Ya, it never puts AI on the runway, or speeds planes past you while you are on final, or takes forever to exit a runway. You must be using a different FS9 than the rest of us because we've all had those experiences. So if the default ATC is so great, why are you using RC?

"No atc program will ever control AI aicraft in fsx or fs9 so get used to it. " As you can see Another member gave him a sarcastic response. Why fuel it?

Ya, it never puts AI on the runway, or speeds planes past you while you are on final, or takes forever to exit a runway. You must be using a different FS9 than the rest of us because we've all had those experiences. So if the default ATC is so great, why are you using RC?

Never said that it was better. Was responding to the op comment that it couldn't be done. And by your tone I'll have to make sure I REALLY think about buying anything from HIFI Sim Again !!!!!!

WELL, msfs9 ATC seems to be able to do it, so it can be done.

But FS is controlling all of the AI -- it creates it, controls it, matches ATC to it (and yet still it fails, as Jim pointed out, when it gets really loaded).An external ATC program could do the same if it also created and controlled the AI. I did explain this in more detail in an earlier message in this thread. The problem is that it would have to work from the outside of FS and either use the asynchronous SimConnect interface into FSX, or, for FS9, either hack mightily into the code to find a way to create non-pre-compiled AI, or use the multiplayer interface. Neither way would ever be as efficient and timely as code actually inbuilt into the FS AI system, so it simply would not be feasible for those wishing a good amount of AI traffic of high quality, as we airliner pilots have become so accustomed to.As I understand it, VoxATC is an ATC program which DOES create its own AI so it can control it. You don't use MyTraffic, or Ultimate Traffic, or even FS's default traffic with it. But it isn't providing a realistic amount of airport traffic, of the quality and quantity which is producing the problems of which you complain. From what I know it simply produces a bit of mainly GA traffic just to make it a bit more plausible.RegardsPete

"No atc program will ever control AI aicraft in fsx or fs9 so get used to it. " As you can see Another member gave him a sarcastic response. Why fuel it?

Actually Jeff it was more empathy then sarcasm, you know how many times an AI aircraft has ruined a perfect flight, I would love to see a ATC based program that could dictate to AI instead of a program making a decision based on what AI are doing. I hate when AI taxi into me or just line up on the runway as I'm about to land, lets not even talk about what varible winds can do at a major airport like KORD, pure chaos, so unless a developer can tap into that AI engine or whatever controls AI and or create its own AI so it can control it as Pete mentioned its just an inconvenience of flying with AI. Maby flight will include an sdk for AI and atc programs, who knows.

And by your tone I'll have to make sure I REALLY think about buying anything from HIFI Sim Again !!!!!!

I agree. From a supposed professional such condescending and sarcastic posts don't bode well for the company your representing.

Did you notice that Pete agreed with me?

I'm not talking about the validity of what your saying, I'm talking about the manner in which you said it

Hi,There is on MAJOR problem with your analogy, as a ticket holding passenger on any airline I have money invested in my ticket and have every right to be upset. As for RC5, you've paid nothing to JD and company, he owes you and all of us nothing. If he decides to stay quiet until he deems there is something to talk about, so be it.

I have been in the airline industry for over 30 years, and if we unfortunately have a service delay the one items most of our passengers demand is up to date communication from the airline. Just look at any TV news reports of a major airline delay and you will here the passengers complaining of lack of news from the airline. This is only human nature, if we book a flight with a major Airline we think is 'customer friendly' and the communication fails, its only normal to get frustrated that our (customer friendly) airline has let us down.This equally applies to favourite software developers, we all have out favourites, the developers of Radar Contact is one of mine. Unfortunately they are badly let down with their communication skills. Please look at the forums of Eagle Dynamics (A-10C Warthog) and PMDG, at the way the developers respect their customers and offer development news whether its good or bad. By far the majority of customers appreciate even bad news if a product is delayed for whatever reason, it keeps them in the loop, and they remain loyal to the product - both of the above developers are a prime example.Sadly the developers of Radar Contact have not leaned this art of communication and feel for whatever reason their loyal customers should not be kept in the loop as far as Radar Contact development is concerned. You will obviously get the immature forum member who will DEMAND a release date for version 5, but the vast majority of us will be happy for any news of our favourite ATC software package, good or bad, we understand.As 'Airbumps' so eloquently said please "Throw up a bone".Best regardsGlen

Did you notice that Pete agreed with me?

Pete explained in a nice way how the ATC program works and why it would be hard to do. Did not see one rude or condensending remark in his post.!!

I empathize with the uncontrollable AI too. Sorry to interpret "get over it" as sarcastic. I can see how it can be interpreted either way.AI runway incursions are frustrating but it happens in real life too. On a real life flight a few months ago we were on short final and the aircraft in front of us did not get off the runway we had to go around. Condescending responses and attitudes of some pay ware developers are disappointing. You have to put youself in their shoes though. Jim explained in a previous response in this thread that multiple threads in different forums went south regarding when a product will be released. I'm sure its frustrating for the developers. The developers also need to put themselves in the CUSTOMERS shoes. If you were a customer and the company was condescending, giving you an attitude of not caring what you think as a customer, would you continue to give them business? I don't know what it is about flight simulator developers. If you look at other software game developers they give multiple updates and screenshots during the development process. They also give a release timeframe. My son get Game Informer Magazine. Every issue has developers doing this. How refreshing would it be to see updates during development here on AVSIM? How refreshing would it be to to have excitement generated on upcoming releases from routine development updates instead of being kept in the dark for two years and condescending responses on forums. Microsoft is doing it with Flight.

Hi,There is on MAJOR problem with your analogy, as a ticket holding passenger on any airline I have money invested in my ticket and have every right to be upset. As for RC5, you've paid nothing to JD and company, he owes you and all of us nothing. If he decides to stay quiet until he deems there is something to talk about, so be it.

Hi MikeI was merely using the airline service delay as an example of how good communication can enhance customer satisfaction or destroy it. I was not trying to compare the two very different scenario's, as you say a ticket is a contract between an airline and the passenger.I was hoping to highlight the advantage of good customer (or future customer) relations and the good will it produces.Glen

It's simple.. the developer doesn't have any obligations to tell anything to anybody. But it's kinda obvious that if the product was announced years ago that potential customers are going to ask questions. It's the developers choice how he's going to answer these questions and how happy customers does he want.

Is RC4 that unusable? I look at it this way, and some may disagree, but RC4 is a vast improvement over default ATC. And that is what is needed. When I see anyone who is on the fence about getting RC because they think RC5 is on the way, I tell them to not hold their breath. RC5 may be in development, but really it is not worth the wait. Just pick up Rc4, it will add to the ATC experience in FSX (9). But I will add that the developer does indeed have no obligations to tell anything to anybody, especially since there is no pre-order here. Just fans of this product who await the next version which is promised to be bigger and better. However, to opt for the total degree of silence will only open up debates like this. The Level D 757 is a good example, vapour ware. And reputations do take a hit. The flight sim community is internet based, and thus become very figidy, very reactionary, and can get quite mean. the PMDG NGX release road is the epitome of that. I saw people claim even that plane was vapour ware just because of PMDGs more than liberal usage of the phrase "coming soon", and I found that quite funny, never saw a vapour ware product with so many videos and screen shots. I know RC is different. No one really seems to clamour for updates on the release quite like they do for aircraft, but it still does prove a point that on a few occasions I have seen the phrase "when hell freezes over" replaced with "when RC5/Level D 757 is released". So it is a two sided coin I guess.

Hi Everyone, First let me say that I cannot believe how a simple question like the status of v5 of RC can turn people into making some condescending comments. I have known Jim for some time and the work they do at HIFi Simulations is nothing but spectacular. Having said that he has to deal on a daily basis with people asking development questions that they won't or cannot answer, same here on the RC forum. V4.3 of RC is a highly sophisticated piece of software and those that desire to have a very realistic ATC control flight in MSFS that can be achieved with the current version of RC. Now the design specifications that the RC team has for v5 are a major step up from the current version, notice I said design specifications, not code. Everyone on the RC team are well aware that many of you want the next version yesterday, we do too. However there are other considerations in play and that JD the developer will release more info at a later date. In the mean time, some of these mean spirited comments about obligations and length of time are just not warranted and reflect poorly on the individuals who keep harping on the topic. What should be posted during this time is what things YOU think should be added to Radar Contact. The RC team communicates daily, and would welcome productive suggestions, not this bickering that has happen all to frequent. Cheers Bob

Thanks Bob!