A quick fly by of Pro ATC

[N1G 88]

I finally bought PATC and am disappointed at this time. The issue I am having is that the program disconnects when trying to contact approach. There is a fix on their website but that did not fix it for me. The program is still running as you can select options like "request lower altitude" and others, and you here the pilot voice but PATC is silent. I also changed course and altitude and no scorns whatsoever from center. It has a long way to go I am afraid.

 

Bob

[propkop2k2 1]

Bob

 

I had the same issue with it not contacting approach.

 

It appears that the co-pilot does not tune the radio to the approach controller. I tuned it manually, I seem to think it was on one of the PATC popup menus, and the controller started issuing orders again. Obviously by the time I had figured that out my approach was all messed up.

 

I think I read the author said that the co-pilot only tunes the radio after completing certain steps in the relevant check lists. I wasn't using them at the time so this could be the cause of it.

 

Mark

[N1G 88]

Bob

 

I had the same issue with it not contacting approach.

 

It appears that the co-pilot does not tune the radio to the approach controller. I tuned it manually, I seem to think it was on one of the PATC popup menus, and the controller started issuing orders again. Obviously by the time I had figured that out my approach was all messed up.

 

I think I read the author said that the co-pilot only tunes the radio after completing certain steps in the relevant check lists. I wasn't using them at the time so this could be the cause of it.

 

Mark

 

I will double check. but I am sure I had approach tuned.

 

Bob

[peppy197 165]

,,,,

 

I find it astounding that there is not one single ATC that can combine a non robotic voice and provide traffic and get from a-b with a sid/star

 

 

....

 

I am sure it is not for want of trying.

Remember that even Microsoft abandonned FSX

 

means a lot

[MindYerBeak 73]

I think the developer will release a patch next week.I hope he will fix things.As it is it is unusable for me. When I bought it I knew I was "punting" I now I have a feeling it was more like a mug punt.

[SteveW 1,792]

This sounds like a very interesting but difficult program to write. I've not tried it yet and my first thoughts:

 

I can't imagine the ATC will be responding to the sim any different to FSX ATC, maybe the wordings will be different, but the mechanics within the sim are the same. The give-away is that the default FSX Ai is used, which is all part of the ATC system. Choosing runways based on the weather, position of the sun, aircraft on approach, etc. all done by that (very complex) system. IF uses heuristics to guess the runways, FSX ATC also.

 

Waypoints and approaches are from the scenery installed. Not every airport has specific SID/STAR approaches and use waypoints for vectoring, not fixes. Even Heathrow has no approaches. ATC will still vector you in/out with no problems. You have no idea what approach you will be on when you get there anyway. When you do, it’s easy to assign the approach to the GPS or FMS. PMDG’s don’t use pre-planned approaches, for example. You can make up an approach in the .PLN for FSX but ATC will take you where it wants.

 

I’ll probably wait a little longer before getting this, see how it progresses first.

[N1G 88]

This sounds like a very interesting but difficult program to write. I've not tried it yet and my first thoughts:

 

I can't imagine the ATC will be responding to the sim any different to FSX ATC, maybe the wordings will be different, but the mechanics within the sim are the same. The give-away is that the default FSX Ai is used, which is all part of the ATC system. Choosing runways based on the weather, position of the sun, aircraft on approach, etc. all done by that (very complex) system. IF uses heuristics to guess the runways, FSX ATC also.

 

Waypoints and approaches are from the scenery installed. Not every airport has specific SID/STAR approaches and use waypoints for vectoring, not fixes. Even Heathrow has no approaches. ATC will still vector you in/out with no problems. You have no idea what approach you will be on when you get there anyway. When you do, it’s easy to assign the approach to the GPS or FMS. PMDG’s don’t use pre-planned approaches, for example. You can make up an approach in the .PLN for FSX but ATC will take you where it wants.

 

I’ll probably wait a little longer before getting this, see how it progresses first.

 

Hey Steve, nice to see you here. I do wish you would have taken something like this on because you have not only the talent but the dedication, customer service skills and the ability to listen and get the job done. This program has a long way to go even to get close to RC. I hope it does as I have invested in his company and I do wish to see improvements moving forward.

 

Bob

[Chock 17,769]

This sounds like a very interesting but difficult program to write. I've not tried it yet and my first thoughts:

 

I can't imagine the ATC will be responding to the sim any different to FSX ATC, maybe the wordings will be different, but the mechanics within the sim are the same.

 

I don't think it is entirely the same as how one uses the default ATC for one's flight. The thing which makes me say that, is that in Pro ATC, the actual flight seems very much like an old FS98 'Adventure', i.e. it appears to be a bit more 'on rails' than how one typically uses the default FS ATC. With the default ATC, things are a bit more 'on the fly', you can cancel stuff, change plans in the air, divert, etc, etc. Pro ATC appears to me to be a somewhat pre-compiled plan in the manner of Adventures and also Pro Flight, whereby much of it is written in stone, with it triggering the next response when you hit a waypoint as it monitors the progress of your aircraft, which (theoretically at least) works well as long as you stay with the script in the sense that you hit the trigger points. As anyone who uses Radar Contact will know, RC offers a bit more flexibility in that regard, whereby you can divert, declare an emergency, etc, etc. What I do know Pro ATC does, is work independently of the ATC as far as your aircraft is concerned, thus the default ATCis controlling the AI, and Pro ATC is controlling your flight, which is why you are not slotted into the departure line along with the AI.

 

That is certainly the impression that I get from it when using Pro ATC, and it would seem to be confirmed by the inability of it to rectify itself when you get a glitch at the TOD, as I have been experiencing. In the default ATC, if there was some kind of glitch, one could always cancel the IFR, go to the nearest airport list and then get vectors that way, not that I've ever really witnessed the default ATC glitching in that manner.

 

It is not unknown for Radar Contact to have the odd glitch, but they are a rarity, so it definitely seems more robust than Pro ATC is at the moment, and more realistic in the sense that you are part of the world that AI is operating in. I certainly hope that changes, because if the glitches in Pro ATC are ironed out and a bit more flexibility in the way one creates a flight plan is introduced, I would prefer its ATC audio to other offerings, and as noted previously, I do really like its co-pilot feature very much indeed.

 

Anyway, going to try the patch and see if that sorts out the TOD woes.

 

Al

[N1G 88]

I don't think it is entirely the same as how one uses the default ATC for one's flight. The thing which makes me say that, is that in Pro ATC, the actual flight seems very much like an old FS98 'Adventure', i.e. it appears to be a bit more 'on rails' than how one typically uses the default FS ATC. With the default ATC, things are a bit more 'on the fly', you can cancel stuff, change plans in the air, divert, etc, etc. Pro ATC appears to me to be a somewhat pre-compiled plan in the manner of Adventures and also Pro Flight, whereby much of it is written in stone, with it triggering the next response when you hit a waypoint as it monitors the progress of your aircraft, which (theoretically at least) works well as long as you stay with the script in the sense that you hit the trigger points. As anyone who uses Radar Contact will know, RC offers a bit more flexibility in that regard, whereby you can divert, declare an emergency, etc, etc. What I do know Pro ATC does, is work independently of the ATC as far as your aircraft is concerned, thus the default ATCis controlling the AI, and Pro ATC is controlling your flight, which is why you are not slotted into the departure line along with the AI.

 

That is certainly the impression that I get from it when using Pro ATC, and it would seem to be confirmed by the inability of it to rectify itself when you get a glitch at the TOD, as I have been experiencing. In the default ATC, if there was some kind of glitch, one could always cancel the IFR, go to the nearest airport list and then get vectors that way, not that I've ever really witnessed the default ATC glitching in that manner.

 

It is not unknown for Radar Contact to have the odd glitch, but they are a rarity, so it definitely seems more robust than Pro ATC is at the moment, and more realistic in the sense that you are part of the world that AI is operating in. I certainly hope that changes, because if the glitches in Pro ATC are ironed out and a bit more flexibility in the way one creates a flight plan is introduced, I would prefer its ATC audio to other offerings, and as noted previously, I do really like its co-pilot feature very much indeed.

 

Anyway, going to try the patch and see if that sorts out the TOD woes.

 

Al

 

Al, I think you may be thinking this through correctly and I will tell you why. There was a post from a fella complaining about something not working. I cant remember exactly what it was but.... The developer had asked the customer did you complete the checklists. I am not sure how exactly it was worded but it sounded like one must go through these steps before the next event can take place. This does sound a lot like what you are saying. It is scripted to some degree and also might explain why I was not able to contact approach. May have been I was off course, or not at the right altitude etc. Now I did not use the checklists so maybe one of these issues triggered a no response from the program. If it proves that these are scripted adventures somewhat then I will be very disappointed. One thing I disliked from the beginning was the programs inability to assign a path to the runway. It did not mention what taxiways to follow. This should have been something at a basic level included with the ground response. I hope this is not the case with this software.

 

Bob

[Chock 17,769]

I don't think the use of checklists is a trigger for the ATC, I've skipped them a few times and not seen any ill effect from having done that. It that were the case, it seems unlikely that there would be numerous options to have stuff either on or off.

 

Al

[N1G 88]

I don't think the use of checklists is a trigger for the ATC, I've skipped them a few times and not seen any ill effect from having done that. It that were the case, it seems unlikely that there would be numerous options to have stuff either on or off.

 

Al

 

I just tried again. I contact approach and no answer. Go back to center and it tells me to contact approach. I move to approach frequency and select contact approach and I am still on center freq and tells me again to contact approach on 119.0. I contact them and no answer. I then tried a request for lower altitude and no response. Something is really messed up.

 

Bob

[propkop2k2 1]

This program is definitely just running against a scripted route. It does not adapt itself if you bypass a waypoint.

 

Just tried a short 1 hour hop. I deliberately flew around a waypoint and carried on to the next one on the route. After overflying a couple of points it was still trying to vector me back to the one I missed. Anyway I relented and turned around following the vectors handed out to me. Now it is leading me off into the middle of nowhere. It keeps gives me a heading of 60 for two minutes then tells me to fly heading 240 for another two minutes. These alternating headings have been going on for 20 minutes, taking me further away from any of the routes waypoints.

 

Pity, I actually liked the way it was able to calculate the SID/STARS on the fly.

 

Mark

[Chock 17,769]

Currently flying a route with it to test if the patch sorts it out for me. I'm presently in the cruise at 36,000 over Brest, just about to go over Biscay in my shiny 747-200. After that I'll be pasing over Bilbao, and then on over central Spain until I get (hopefully) a descent to LEAM somewhere near the Yankee Echo Sierra VOR, hopefully not getting vectored into the Sierra Nevada mountains, which is what the FSX ATC normally vectors you for LOL. Anyhow, we shall see.

 

Al

[tf51d 284]

Al I flew that flight to LEAM, you posted with default AI, and it didn't vector me into the mountains, in fact it put me on a parallel course just about 1-2nm to the left from my plotted course on the FMC. Maybe the problem is the AFCAD you used?

[Chock 17,769]

There is no problem at LEAM yet, I've never made it as far as the descent with Pro ATC thus far, it has always bombed before I got to that point. Currently approaching the Spanish coast from Biscay, west of the Pyrenees, so we'll know in about 55 mins or so.

 

Al