In ridiculous configurations... it's IMC and ATC wants me to report an aircraft 3000 feet below me traveling in the opposite direction...Oh yeah... I have traffic in site. Sure.

huh...ok...then tell them you dont have the traffic in sight, simple, that is why that option exist in the menu.and yes, this does happen in real life, center and app/dep ATC rarely are aware if you in IMC or not.

I don't tell them anything, though I do whisper for them to shut up. Like I need to report the Vickers on final as I'm passing over the airport at 3500 feet?And I seriously doubt controllers ask a pilot who's IFR to start birdwatching.

That has been one of the requests to be fixed in the next release of Flight Simulator.

It is important to note that real ATC is required to have you report traffic under certain parameters. And they really don't know if your IMC or not. So, at least for real ATC, they will call traffic to you and if you don't have it because of IMC or whatever, tell them so.To quote a real ZTL enroute controller on the issue (http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/186249-1.html):Traffic, Traffic, TrafficIf I could get you to read both paragraphs in their entirety you might notice something. Neither paragraph mentions the weather. Neither paragraph mentions anything about "courtesy." And I'm not Olive Oyl.Just in case the preceding paragraph leaves you confused, I guess you would be one of the rare pilots who answers a traffic call with quaint phraseology like "Negative Contact." Some pilots seem to be under the impression that controllers only call traffic when the pilot stands a chance of seeing the traffic. (Don't feel bad -- some controllers are too.) So they'll answer a traffic call with a weather report: "We're IMC, Center."Having talked to a few pilots in my career, I know that some are under the mistaken impression that we call traffic as a courtesy. I guess there are times that we do but the main reason is because the books says we're supposed to. So when we do (call traffic) we're expecting one of two replies: "Negative Contact" or "Traffic in sight." Actually there is a third reply we should expect, but it's so rare that when anyone asks for a vector around traffic it tends to surprise us.What we don't expect is confusing phraseology. "Traffic not in sight." "I've got him on the fish-finder." I don't consider the term "no joy" confusing but I don't see it in the book either. Ditto for "tally ho," "looking," "searching," and "radar contact." And yes, I know what "popeye" means, sailor man, but most other landlubbers don't. What this means for MSFS? Well, I would say the traffic calls probably need help but there might be some basis in reality as to why it is the way it is.

Thanks for the notes guys.I'm all for realism, but as I illustrated, some instances of ATC's request are pretty humorous!Andrew

Andrew,If you've grown tired of the default ATC have a think about Radar Contact. It's a commercial package and is far more accurate to how the real world operates.I don't make any money from sales - I'm just a beta tester. I just prefer to fly as close as possible to how the real world guys do and RC allows me to do just that. You can read more here... www.jdtllc.com/ Version 4 is currently being written and tested and will be offered at a discount price for owners of previous versions.Cheers,

And I seriously doubt controllers ask a pilot who's IFR to start birdwatching .Sure we do. We do it all the time with IFR flights... but maybe you're getting confused between IFR and IMC? If we suspect an IFR flight is in IMC then we usually ask the question, "What are your flight conditions?" to see if it's worth passing traffic information. Pete

Hi Ray, yeah, actually, I've read about RC for some years now but never have felt ready to go on with it...I'm not tired of FS2004 ATC yet - while I'd like them to speak a bit more quickly, and although sometimes the pilot has the same voice as the controller, it's fairly good.If V4 of RC integrates well with what's there (e.g. if it "knows" where FS traffic is) and addresses/fixes some of the issues discussed in its reviews, I'll certainly be considering it.thanks,Andrew

I'm an RC 3.1 user. The current build (officially a beta) knows where AI traffic is within a certain boundary and will call traffic alerts to you (option needs to be enabled). This version has no AI control. It knows if the runway is not clear and if the favorite AI habit of taxying onto the runway while you are on close final occurs, it will issue you a go-around.Version 4 advertises being able to:1: Establish AI runway/pattern usage trends of active AI at airports to help merge with the runway FS dictated AI traffic is using. It can without this feature select a different runway than FS at some times with the current version.2: Version 4 will also have some AI control offering vector diversion to AI as well as your aircraft for enroute collision avoidance. It is also stated to be able to control ground AI to keep them from entering the runway while you are on close final avoiding the issuance of a go-around.By experience, I can highly recommend RC because of the flexibility in options available to make your flight more realistic in nature. There is a bit of a learning curve but the result is worth it.

I hear ya, bro! My favorite line is when they say "traffic is Cessna 172, 3200 feet at your six o'clock". Let's say I'm at, oh, 5000' at the time. Can you imagine an aircraft that is configured to allow for unobstructed views to your six and down? If so, I'll bet fighter pilots would love to have one. Yet it happens all the time. I just say "traffic not in sight" and move on.

I understand the difference between IFR and IMC - and personally, I can't wait to try it out for real one day... I've got about 44 hours and four solos so I'm trying to discern the differences between what I'm doing in FS and what I can expect for real!My point being, do you ask an aircraft at 3200 feet, having passed directly over an airport 45 seconds ago, to report the aircraft on final at their 5 o'clock?And do you ask two planes in IFR to report each other? I thought ATC is there to provide separation.My understanding is that the controller determines if the traffic is a "factor" and if it is not, they don't ask other aircraft to report it visually.Guess I need to read up!Thanks,Andrew

Your 172 doesn't have one of those periscope thingies? :)When ATC makes a request like that to me, I just tell them to hold on while I swing it around 90 degrees and check.I swear, I'm gonna record a new sound file for "traffic not in sight"....Andrew

Hi Andrew,Ronzie has already given you a taster of what v4 will be offering. I'm currently testing it with Ultimate Traffic (set at 100%) and RC interacts with that traffic in a very satisfactory way. No more will you hear fictitious calls to other aircraft - all RC instructions are with other Ai aircraft in the FS skies. It makes the flying experience very satisfying.And, of course, RC has controllers and pilots with accents other than American which makes a nice change when you're flying in Europe. All in all it's a big step up from v3.Cheers,

Thanks again for the info, it sounds really good. Andrew