Best ATC Addon

[scandinavian13 5,192]

From what I have read, I'm unable to agree (at the momement). The reason for the warning is explained on the product's support forum. To give a short summary:

 

The program reads the required runway length through SimConnect. If the aircraft doesn't report these values, the ATC program does not know what runways the aircraft is able to use. More informative message could be "I don't know your aircrafts performace figures, so please request a runway that is most suitable for you"

 

You might have to request a specific runway in the rw. Just watched Just Planes DVD where a flight from Stockholm to Newark was too heavy to depart from the assigned runway. They had to request a longer runway.

 

So even people with professional systems might have enough data to make "correct" desicions. How about a computer that knows even less? The point being, I personally believe that the program isn't playing a role of a dispatcher. Just trying to warn that it doesn't have enough data to work "correctly".

 

I see what you're trying to say, but only to a certain degree.  ATC does not set the operations configuration based on your plane (or any single plane, for that matter).  The controller making the call (based on SOP) as to what runways are in use generally:

-Looks at the wind

-Makes a call based on SOP (which is heavily dependent on the wind)

-Tosses up an ATIS

-Starts pushing traffic

 

Most SOPs are written such that the longest, and/or most useful runway is the primary runway, and others are used when there's an operational advantage.  An example of this would be DCA.  It has three runways: 01-19, 04-22, and 15-33.  01-19 is always the primary runway, and the only determination is north or south operations, based on the wind.  The other two are there when controllers see an operational advantage (smaller planes to depart or land on them for better load management, mainly).

 

The point I'm trying to make is that 99% of your controlled fields are going to use the runway that will be able to accommodate most of the traffic that needs to land there.  A controller is not going to choose a significantly shorter runway just because it's more aligned with the wind (like FSX ATC will do).

 

As Wim mentioned, and you saw in that video, a pilot will occasionally decline the runway assignment in favor of another.  That is a pilot/dispatch role.  A controller will never make an operational call like that for you.  As I mentioned before, if a controller has doubts you can pull it off safely, they may reiterate the runway length, or even go as far as to say "departure is at your discretion," but it's not their place to tell you a runway is too short.

 

You'll note that in this clip, the controller first suggests a different field (based on weather, not aircraft performance), and then uses that "at your discretion" when clearing the pilot to land.

 

In the United States, note that FAR 91.103 is very clear in its determination of who needs to do their homework for aircraft performance:

Each pilot in command shall, before beginning a flight, become familiar with all available information concerning that flight. This information must include [...] for any flight, runway lengths at airports of intended use, and the [...] takeoff and landing distance information.

 

As you saw in that video (and as Wim mentioned), it's on the pilot/dispatcher to make that call, and request a more suitable runway.  For this reason, the ATC program shouldn't even be looking at any data related to the aircraft.

[Jarkko 59]

Thank you Kyle for a great post!

[scandinavian13 5,192]

Thank you Kyle for a great post!

 

Olkaa hyvä!

(and that's just about all of the suomi I remember...haha)

[Jarkko 59]

Sorry for going off topic, but I'm impressed! I would have never guessed that some day I would see Finnish written on avsim

 

You just made my day and for that I have to say: Kiitos paljon!

[Gregg_Seipp 568]

I'd be glad to have traffic like that, even if you're loading mid-air.  Just log on at an airport and coordinate it so I can clear some space.  MTN and a few others in my area (ZDC) have arcs and other cool approaches (LDAs, or charted visuals, etc.).

 

That isn't annoying at all.  What's annoying is people complaining about me giving them a visual in weather like this:

KIAD 021252Z 28012G20KT 10SM SKC 04/M10 A3012 RMK AO2

 

...but I wanted to AUTOLAND!!!

You asked for it...LOL.  I won't be back at my sim until the weekend.  How do I coordinate it, over frequency?  What I was doing a couple weeks ago at KSBA is their GPS or VOR/DME to 25...with DME, without DME, procedure turn, 'vectored' right to KWANG IAF.  It's a bit tricky since my route was on a VTU radial to KWANG but KWANG isn't defined by VTU but by two other VORs (RZS and GVO).  I was studying how it worked out, how to switch between navaids when I didn't have DME.  (I finally settled on flying on the VTU course until I crossed the RZS crossing radial and then tuning GVO to commence the straight in approach.)

[scandinavian13 5,192]

 

How do I coordinate it, over frequency?

 

If you're flying a whole flight, there's no need.  Just call for clearance and fly it like a normal flight (throwing "practice approaches" in the comments would help, though).

If you want to load up in the air, log onto VATSIM at some random airport and call whatever controller is up (if it's Wash. Center, it'll be 133.72) and let them know what you want to do:

"Hey center - I'm looking to practice some approaches and would like to load up in the air to save some time."

'Sure what approach?'

"VOR/DME Runway 15 for MTN." (that's one with a DME arc)

'Sure - load up over the BALtimore VOR at 6000.'

 

...and off ya go.  Then you can land, and while you're on the ground, let the guy know where you'd like to go next.

 

As far as your SBA approaches, you've got it right.  I'm not as familiar with the West Cost, but looking at the MSA at the bottom left, I'm imagining that the controller's MVA isn't too far off.  That being said, they'll probably vector you onto the final approach course right at KWANG, as once you're established on the radial, you can see your min altitude is 2100.  That would give you time to get down from [likely pretty high] to 2100 without punishing your ear drums.  If approach vanished and I had to do it on my own, I would likely do it the same way you did.

[Boomer 1,619]

The best thing about Flight sim is VATSIM or simular. I just can't understand the need for ATC programs.

 

Simple:  VATSIM etc never has complete coverage; in fact it is often very sporadic at best.

[Gregg_Seipp 568]

 

'Sure - load up over the BALtimore VOR at 6000.'

 

Oh, that's tricky.  I guess I could slew over to it and then load up.  Sounds like fun.  Thanks!

[scandinavian13 5,192]

Oh, that's tricky.  I guess I could slew over to it and then load up.  Sounds like fun.  Thanks!

 

I prefer not to slew, so I just find an airport that's near the IAF, or some part of the approach.  You could just as easily load up at BWI Airport and go from there, but if you want to avoid the time for taxi/departure, you can use the method I described.

[Gregg_Seipp 568]

 

I prefer not to slew

 

I usually don't like it either...terrifying moments to get the airplane stable once you get where you need to be.  I did find out that if you slew someplace and then move your airspeed forward while in slew by pressing the up key before going out of slew, that it starts up out of slew at that speed.  So, it's a lot easier than starting at 0 knots.  Then, once it's stable, I can pause, save and do what I need to do before continuing the flight.

[zmak 331]

He's only joking There is no money in these networks, it's there for Flight Simmer enjoyment.

So it's not really a plug. It is a suggestion, why pay for something that can't compete with a real form of RC.

 

I think its best to have both real world and synthetic. There are a lot and I mean a lot of areas vatsim doesnt cover with controllers and your going to be a bit bored typing away the odd line here and there.

 

I use both by the way and just signed up for pilot edge trial

 

Hello!

 

I'll bite I got VoxATC after using RC4 for a long time. I wanted to try four things that RC4 didn't have: 

 

1) Talking to ATC with "correct" phraseology (I used RC4 with IYP so I could talk to RC4, but wanted  "more").

 

2) Ground handling. VoxATC gives you taxiways to use and is aware of the other ground traffic (because it generates the traffic). And it's nice to be number 8+ for departure on large airports.

 

3) Full support for SIDs and STARs. I enjoy the fact that the aircraft that depart in front of you (sometimes) fly the same SID you have been assigned.

 

4) VFR flying

 

There are a couple of things that I personally would like to see changed in VoxATC:

 

- Vectoring currently not aware of the terrain. Safest way is to request full approach when there is dangerous terrain around the airport.

 

- Correct transition altitudes for the whole world.

 

- Radio frequency ping-pong when flying near borders.

 

- This is more of on issue with Opus, but tail wind landings are quite common. Opus recovers the surface winds too late for ATC programs to assign a correct runway. If the weather could be read from a weather engine specific file, this would not be a problem.

 

To summarize: I'm happy with VoxATC and RC4.

 

EDIT: Having said all that, I'm currently following ProATC very closely. When they get the ATC part working solid, I will give it a try. Already have the money "earmarked"

 

Vox atc have just released the latest version. One subtle improvement is making the ivona voices scratchy so it sounds like its a radio.

great programme, issues sids/stars just before departure and on descent

[joolsd 10]

I think its best to have both real world and synthetic. There are a lot and I mean a lot of areas vatsim doesnt cover with controllers and your going to be a bit bored typing away the odd line here and there.

Saturday evenings are mayhem in the UK. You won't get much of a rest from ATC if you file a flight EGKKEGCC or EGLLEDDM. Occationally southern Scotland is unicomm. You know... sometimes you want to chill, so unicomm can't come quick enough. The UK, is quite compacted, so almost echos what happens in real life.

 

I can understand if people like the synthetic ATC, it is after all private. Not being the most sociable flight simmer, I understand this. And I guess you can pratice atc before connecting with vatsim.

[scandinavian13 5,192]

 

And I guess you can pratice atc before connecting with vatsim.

 

True and not so true.  When controlling on VATSIM, I can definitely pick out those who are confident because of the synthetic ATC, but have picked up all of its bad habits.

 

"...requesting clearance as filed."

 

:rolleyes:

[Gary1999 7]

True and not so true.  When controlling on VATSIM, I can definitely pick out those who are confident because of the synthetic ATC, but have picked up all of its bad habits.

 

"...requesting clearance as filed."

 

:rolleyes:

 

 

lol yup

 

vatsim bad habits are awesome..

 

I particiularly like the text ctaf calls describing absolutely everything the pilot is doing

[HansRoaming 73]

I use VOXATC and VATSIM, I find VOX is great for training me how to speak when I'm on VATSIM and it does do SIDs and STARs.

 

VATSIM though is dynamic and will through up situations VOX will never do so for me its more immersive.