Key important factors include the taxiways given for taxi instructions are totally wrong.

 

They were pretty fictitious initially, just to give a realistic "feel" to the ATC, but now, with everything matched to your installed scenery, the taxi instructions are correct. In fact ProATC/X has beaten RC in this regard -- I originally added taxiway data to my MakeRunways database program explicitly for RC version 5, which has been in the works now for 2-3 years and doesn't look like ever seeing the light of day. ProATC/X has taken advantage of this data first in its release last week.

 

I rarely ever got any approach instructions

 

That was sporadic and is fixed now. It was, I believe, to do with the tightness of the waypoint checks.

 

... and the way you can only fly the PROATCX flightplan in the PMDG NGX is weird and incredibly unrealistic to me. I like to actually enter in the waypoints and select the SID/STAR...with PROATCX you have to select a pre loaded Flight Plan in the FMC and fly it, you cannot enter waypoints into the FMC and fly them realistically.

 

That is actually completely untrue. You can enter the waypoints manually if you wish, or you can fly without an FMC -- many do, in aircraft without such sophisticated instrumentation. I use Project Magenta and most certainly do not (currently) load any plan file produced by ProATC. The format of the ProATC export plans did not suit it in any case, though the format I would need is being added in the next release which is imminent.

 

Additionally, ProATC/X realistically only assigns the SID when the take off runway has been decided, based on wind etc, and only assigns the STAR when contacting Approach. These are also the times when you'd enter such data into your CDU (or at least check/change any previous 'best guess' made on the basis of METAR reports).

 

I understand the next update will accept the input of externally generated plans, too, rather than only using those of its own computation. This will meet the needs of VA fliers who fly laid down company routes.

 

Whilst I would agree that ProATC/X was released as a "full product" rather early in its development, the determination and responsiveness of its developer has resulted in fast development and the current batch of more hellpful users has been helping to mould it into what will, I think, become the "bees-knees" of ATC programs.

 

Regards

Pete

Is it worth getting this yet? I'm still using the rather dated RC4 - It was good a few years ago and is still much better than FSX's own effort, but the unrealistic handling of SIDS/STARS bothers me - How does this program assign SID/STARS? And is it still a requirement to make the flight plan within the program, or can you use fsbuild now? (that's the real selling point for me, if they've included that, then I'm in!)

 

Also are there still a huge amount of bugs to be ironed out, or does it feel a more completed product now?

Is it worth getting this yet? I'm still using the rather dated RC4 - It was good a few years ago and is still much better than FSX's own effort, but the unrealistic handling of SIDS/STARS bothers me - How does this program assign SID/STARS?

 

Currently it generates a route for you. If you don't like it you can tell it to generate another, or you can edit it, but currently you always start off with a plan it makes, not one from an external planner. This is set to change soon with facilities to import plans in, I think, standard ICAO form. Not sure yet though.

 

You do not include the SIDs/STARs in the plan, as in real life. they are assigned at the appropriate times - SID when the runway is assigned and STAR by Approach. I don't think you can currently choose your own, but I'm not really sure about that.

 

I still use RC4 but I am toying with Pro-ATCX. It does sound better than RC, more like real ATC sound, but still doesn't really deal with AI traffic as well (though RC is no saint there either). With the recent updates ProATC is giving proper taxi instructions which is a big plus over RC.

 

And is it still a requirement to make the flight plan within the program, or can you use fsbuild now? (that's the real selling point for me, if they've included that, then I'm in!)

 

At present it still is the planner. As I said, plan importing is due soon.

 

Also are there still a huge amount of bugs to be ironed out, or does it feel a more completed product now?

 

There are a few quirks, to do with things like shared frequencies (eg when clearance and ground share the same frequency), and the tightness of checks on waypoint passing, but both are being dealt with. The developer is very responsive and working very hard to meet every one's expectations and wishes. I count this as a very big plus compared to a stagnant RC. I suspect there's also a bit of a problem with approaches for which no STARs are known, but i'm not sure about this.

 

Regards

Pete

Just watched the videos on their site. Are there any other voices? Sounds very useful for Lufthansa Virtual but are there any UK/US voices?

With respect, I think the teutonic accents would wear quite thin after a while!

Just watched the videos on their site. Are there any other voices? Sounds very useful for Lufthansa Virtual but are there any UK/US voices?

With respect, I think the teutonic accents would wear quite thin after a while!

 

If you check the downloads page you'll see at least two other sets of voices. One Canadian, and the other 'unknown' (sorry, I've not tried either yet).

 

I expect the author is hoping folks will do some more voluntarily, just like the way the RCV4 voice sets were done.

 

Regards

Pete

Ah thanks, yes I just spotted those!

Looking at the frequent updates I am tempted to buy, aware of course that it's far from perfect for now, but I kind of look upon it as a "Kickstarter" investment.

Looking at the frequent updates I am tempted to buy, aware of course that it's far from perfect for now, but I kind of look upon it as a "Kickstarter" investment.

 

Could be a good idea.Just make sure you run a search here on avsim and read stuff through.At least if you end up walking like a cowboy for 3 days you know why :-)

Could be a good idea.Just make sure you run a search here on avsim and read stuff through.At least if you end up walking like a cowboy for 3 days you know why :-)

LOL, been there got the scars... anyway we need a better ATC so at least buying it helps the developer to evolve it further.

I did the same with Opus and haven't regretted it.

anyway we need a better ATC so at least buying it helps the developer to evolve it further

 

In this case you'd be funding the wrong developer, imo.

 

In this case you'd be funding the wrong developer, imo.

Which developer would you fund?

I have already funded RC4, VoxATC v6, and PFE.

All apart from VoxATC are pretty much dead in the water as far as I am aware.

Which developer would you fund?

 

A this point it's more like what developer I would not support/fund.After all you need to separate the wheat from the chaff .Some people seem to think that just because a moderator openly praises a product that it's got to be good.I think it's wrong.You can dress the shepherd in silk but it will still smell of the goat.

A this point it's more like what developer I would not support/fund.After all you need to separate the wheat from the chaff .Some people seem to think that just because a moderator openly praises a product that it's got to be good.I think it's wrong.You can dress the shepherd in silk but it will still smell of the goat.

 

Only from Pete Dawson 's post above can i undertsand for the first time that Pro ATC does not actually allow you to use FSX flight plan created by another tools other than Pro ATC. This is a big show stopper for me. All my plans are created in FS Commander easy to use, means i cant consider Pro ATC till flight plan import is added.

 

And Yes its strange how Pro ATC seems to have been or is being pushed forward by some forces, and that wount be so bad if it was a product of descent standard rather than a beta test product that only has its full features for Europe/UK only, rather than global.

 

Trust is one of the most valuable and overlooked commodities, hence misused and abused, to the point where nobody believes anything you say anymore, then things fall apart.

 

I purchased Pro ATC largely casue i saw this huge thread going to 27 pages, but really when you purchase the product for 40 Euros like i did, youll see in no way does it really justify a 27 page thread, unless there is some force pushing it. I cant use the product in its current form. Dont plan flights in ATC addon, and fly world not just europe uk

I purchased Pro ATC largely casue i saw this huge thread going to 27 pages, but really when you purchase the product for 40 Euros like i did, youll see in no way does it really justify a 27 page thread, unless there is some force pushing it.

I purchased Pro ATC largely casue i saw this huge thread going to 27 pages, but really when you purchase the product for 40 Euros like i did, youll see in no way does it really justify a 27 page thread, unless there is some force pushing it.

 

This program cost fat eur 50 not 40.Not sure I'm following you.You went through all this pages and you bought it right ? Did you read all the posts? I have the feeling that the flightsim market is a lot like the Uk horseracing betting market.You have the mugs who buy the racingpost ,lump on the most tipped favourites (the tipsters are the experts right ) and end up on a loser.Most often then not turns out those dead certs are beaten out of sight by some donkey the tipsters thought couldn't win even if it started running the day before.

 

Nowadays they have shareware,freeware and payware.They should add shove-ware :-)

This program cost fat eur 50 not 40.Not sure I'm following you.You went through all this pages and you bought it right ? Did you read all the posts? I have the feeling that the flightsim market is a lot like the Uk horseracing betting market.You have the mugs who buy the racingpost ,lump on the most tipped favourites (the tipsters are the experts right ) and end up on a loser.Most often then not turns out those dead certs are beaten out of sight by some donkey the tipsters thought couldn't win even if it started running the day before.

 

Nowadays they have shareware,freeware and payware.They should add shove-ware :-)

Hi MindYerBeak, have you actually purchased and used the ProATC-X?

Without wanting to come across rude, you seem to have a very strong opinion of it which seems largely based upon negative feedback of earlier versions.

From what I have gleaned it will shortly be possible to import a FP and other useful features are being added along the way.

I can understand that buying-in to a "non-mature" product can leave a nasty taste, but the practice seems to be quite frequent these days (CaptainSim, Blackbox, Opus etc).

Caveat emptor indeed but I think these guys should be given a chance and I think they have a strong product.

After having read several posts from happy customers (yes there are some :wink:)I am happy to say I have now purchased and look forward to using the software and helping to improve it as it matures.

 

Best regards,

Dave

Only from Pete Dawson 's post above can i undertsand for the first time that Pro ATC does not actually allow you to use FSX flight plan created by another tools other than Pro ATC. This is a big show stopper for me. All my plans are created in FS Commander easy to use, means i cant consider Pro ATC till flight plan import is added.

 

It's "Dowson" actally, and, yes, I agree, it is most important for it to accept plans made elsewhere. This is why I am currently only "toying" with it whilst using RC for 'proper' flying. I think this is being worked on as I write this, but at present I don't know what the format it will accept will be. I suspect it will be ICAO format, such as the plans you get from EuroFPL and VRoute.

 

And Yes its strange how Pro ATC seems to have been or is being pushed forward by some forces, and that wount be so bad if it was a product of descent standard rather than a beta test product that only has its full features for Europe/UK only, rather than global.

 

Whilst I am not pushing it, I certainly do think it has great promise, and to me it sounds far more 'real' than all the others I've tried (short of on-line flying). I would likely have stuck with RC forever if the promises for RCV5 had ever come to anything, but currently that's been shelved. Maybe it will be revived, but it seems it'll be nearly a year before even that's decided. Having seen the changes made in Pro-ATC/X in only the last few weeks I have greater faith that it will turn out exactly what I need in a much shorter time. It's also very encouraging that its author responds to suggestions and requests with actual implementations within a remarkably short time.

 

As for "Europe/UK" only, I don't know what you mean by that. Maybe because it only has three added voices so far? Surely not, as one of those is Canadian. Or because it uses proper ICAO terminology instead of local North American FAR (though I think they've been converging recently in any case)?

 

Pete