Unfortunately all waypoints imported from proatc are flyover ones.

Interesting, could you elaborate, please. What does this imply?

 

Thanks,

Dirk.

I use PFE right now (In fact I'm using it now (NZWN-YMML) ) but I do have PROATC/X, and it does have high potential! It need to have more AI interaction (Preferably control, but I know that's a tall order!) is the main issue. The last couple of flights I had with it was a little strange. Both was a short flight between KLAX-KSAN. Both flights I started at gate B53 (Delta Airlines) Normally I would expect runway 25R for takeoff, but it assigned 24L. On the other side of the airport. I've seen this in PFE too, so it may be something in my AFCAD On the first flight, I was assigned Runway 9 ILS approach. (Based on winds), It set me up a little high, and I was coming in a little fast, so I decided to declare a missed approach, which ATC quickly denied, with a response "Not at this time"? , the second flight was better, this time assigning me Runway 27 visual approach,  this time setting up my altitude and speed perfectly for the approach. The only oddity was ATC brought me in by a South approach, rather the expected approach from the North.

 

 

I've seen in another post it seems this program was made more for Europe than the USA.

 

Here is my mini review for what its worth. 

 

The last update made a correction in my opinion that would make it somewhat more balanced as to Europe and N.America IMO. This was the inclusion of the way STARs are done here in N.America with their respective transition options. For the longest time, its logic was only thinking Europe. So the waypoints are being added better.   Better as in not perfect all the time. There is still issues, with that regard in missing SIDs or STARs thus ATC gets confused. This I believe is a data issue differences between navigraph and navdata pro and the way its read.

 

The other problem is IMHO is too many people relying on this pro atc clearance file to upload to coroute or the approach file. This is causing more headaches than not. Unless you live in the Star Trek era, ive never heard of ATC jumping in your cockpit and doing your route or arrival for you. Not saying im better in the least, but its less issues and headaches if you do it yourself as the Captain of the ship to ensure what you are putting in is correct. Not that hard to add a STAR and transition in the FMC on the NGX or any FMC  aircraft for that matter.  On long routes, import from a flight planner to coroute, and upload that same fightplan from the other flightplanner to ProAtc. This is a copy. IF the data is correctly read from the AIRAC DB then the waypoints should be in there. What becomes sketchy is the vectoring to the IAF and FAF. The so called flight planner should be there only to file the flightplan for ATC to know about your intentions and thats it. Import your route with a proper flight planner. Ensure your flightplan is the correct one all the time. If there is an issue with ATC, ask for a "direct to".

 

 Ive always taken the moto which I think is close to real world...You fly the aircraft, not ATC so if there is going to be a big conflict that is dangerous or even risky, its our responsibility to take appropriate action and especially so when a computer is trying to control us rather than a human with dynamic decisions.  

 

I do wish they would stop adding features for the time being except for adding voice and controlling AI but having the main focus as getting the procedures down right, no matter where in the world. That said, its a computer program, not a human. Its very linear and follows stringent set of rules, and this will cause it to mess up. Im sure its a monumental task to get it right.  My last few flights have been much more successful than in the past with some anomalies, and happy to be a part of it to provide feedback and make it better though frustrating at times. 

I'll say this.  ATC is the weakest piece in my immersion in FSX.  As long as VATSIM has spotty coverage (and I don't think that will change) then the market is there.  I agree with what a couple of people said...making software do ATC is difficult to do well.  Seems you would have to program a 'state machine' that always has to monitor states for all aircraft and make adjustments just like controllers do.  I don't envy them the task and I root for them to get it up to a point to make it viable for the average Joe Pilot customer.

Long time user of Radar Contact, which does a good job but is no longer being updated.

 

Looked at ProATC but agree it is currently overpriced for its unfinished state.  Gonna wait on that for a while.

If I could just comment on that. RC v5 is on hold until July when JD will make an announcement on its future. All of us in the beta team hope development will continue as quite a lot of code was written and tested. It would be a shame if it was all in vain.

 

 

The other problem is IMHO is too many people relying on this pro atc clearance file to upload to coroute or the approach file. This is causing more headaches than not. Unless you live in the Star Trek era, ive never heard of ATC jumping in your cockpit and doing your route or arrival for you. Not saying im better in the least, but its less issues and headaches if you do it yourself as the Captain of the ship to ensure what you are putting in is correct.

 

Totally agree Dave!  I always input it myself and then go to the flightplan info on the ProATC menu (believe 1 then 5) and make sure ProATCX is reading the same waypoint as my FMC is reading.  If I don't hear from ATC for a while, I'll also use that "Other options" menu and click on Fly direct to...  If I see I'm flying on the same route and didn't miss a waypoint, I'll simply close it.  If it looks like I skipped a waypoint, I'll ask ATC for a direct to waypoint and that will get me back into line with ATC.  Maybe that's too complicated for some but it really helps me to make sure I'm in tune with ProATC.

 

Best regards,

Jim

Just my humble opinion, but it seems to me that when it comes to complex add ons like ATC for Flight sims, the developer is darned if he does and darned if doesn't. Up until now we have had FSX default ATC which never improved beyond where it was when released as a part of each flight sim released by MS (FS8, FS9, FSX). Then there is RC3, RC4 etc, etc, where what you see is what you get and any improvement only come with (if you are lucky) the next version release and people saying they wish they had this or that implemented.

 

So along comes ProATC that say's hey, we will give you a program that will deliver what YOU want. You tell me what you want and if it is feasible or possible, we will implement it. The price is (outside of purchase) you have to help me do it.

 

As far as I am concerned, based on progress since my purchase and the attitude and hard work Clive and Mourad over at ProATC, my money is on them.

 

Just my two cents.

 

 

As far as I am concerned, based on progress since my purchase and the attitude and hard work Clive and Mourad over at ProATC, my money is on them.

+1

 

 

If it looks like I skipped a waypoint, I'll ask ATC for a direct to waypoint and that will get me back into line with ATC.

Thanks for that little tip Jim

I can't compare Pro-ATC with other ATC add-ons or flying in the USA but I can say that it's a huge improvement on the default FSX ATC for Europeans.

 

Provided you make a reasonable attempt at following the flightplan and instructions, it's idiot-proof  99 times out of 100.

Yes you're right Simon. It would be an easier pill to swallow if this was brought to customer's attention before parting with their money!

 

 

Simon, there is no simple answer to your question. It depends on how involved you are in the hobby. Some folks are just users and are looking for finished and polished products. Others like to get involved with the growth of the hobby and are willing to invest a few bucks in the future of the hobby. I support the product for many reasons. If you have the time to spend a couple hours reading the forums and look at how far this venture has progressed then you will have no doubt as to wheather it is for you now or wait for more developments. ATC is a very complicated thing to simulate. I am enjoying learning as different parts of the program is developed and released. The upside is in the end you want have to spend hours trying to understand a manual that I suspect in going to be very, very long.

 

Fair point there Sam. But like Howard mentions above if the developer makes it clear that it is in fact ongoing development whilst its released then that is ok as the customer is informed and knows what he is paying for. But if not mentioned it might be somewhat wrong. I'm not sure if the Devs mention this with PROATC/X or not but i say this speaking generally to all products released. I do hope this product does indeed evolve into must have software of ATC goodness. :smile2:

For anybody needing great ATC for FSX, PFE has no competition. I cant seem to figure out how or why an incomplete product such as ProATC which I have, will be any competition to PFE, great taxi guidance, advanced configurable ATC, second to none regional voice sets.

 

Am I missing something here, or do folks really prefer beta products to working professional software.

For anybody needing great ATC for FSX, PFE has no competition. I cant seem to figure out how or why an incomplete product such as ProATC which I have, will be any competition to PFE, great taxi guidance, advanced configurable ATC, second to none regional voice sets.

 

Am I missing something here, or do folks really prefer beta products to working professional software.

 

I agree with what you say about PFE, Right now I think it is the number 1 offline ATC replacement program. It is however also no longer being developed, and it does have a few issues. One it's not updated to the new FAA standards, like the adoption of "Line Up and Wait". While it handles SIDs and Stars, like RC4 they must be predefined in the flightplan, and constraints and transitions declared within the PFE interface prior to flight. The other big problem with PFE, is because FSX AI are vectored, like the default ATC system, it issues vector instructions to AI aircraft at cruise. This of course is unrealistic, as the AI should be flying according to it's FP just as you are. The greatest advantage of PROATC/X is that It has the ability to dynamically reassign a SID/STAR mid flight. It also have 2 major hurtles. One is AI interaction or preferably AI control. The other is voice pack consistency , especially with Callsigns. Those KLAX-KSAN flights I was flying were Delta flights. Most controllers and Pilot voices referred to my aircraft as "Delta Airlines" instead of just "Delta" and at least on controller referred to me as "D A L". For a Southwest flight some controllers (Not all) referred to it qas "Sierra- Whiskey-Alpha". This said, as long as it's being actively developed/updated, it has the potential of correcting these issue, and add additional features, that may one day surpass PFE's capabilities.

Interesting, could you elaborate, please. What does this imply?

 

Thanks,

Dirk.

 

Yes, if you import a flight from proatc it was (I say was because I don't know if it got fixed in recent version) a flyover waypoint. Normally the FMC computes the turn so you are on your way without much corrections as the turn begins let's say 2nm out of the waypoint. Flyover waypoints are waypoints, where you begin your turn after flying over it. For a right turn, you'll turn right, and then intercept your planned route with a left turn to be on course. My english isn't as good so it is difficult to explain for me.

 

I build my flights with FSBuild (also with flightsimcommander some time ago) and you can paste them into proatc. The wayfinding was inadequate because you had many direct to's but this got solved with last patch as far as I read.

 

I think the flightplan import feature is pretty good and real. Air Berlin here in germany has most routes programmed within their fmc's already. Mostly there are only some minor changes made manual. So by getting clearance from ATC and then use the co route function is pretty good. Especially because you get it imported without SID/STAR and runway. So you have to do the work after you get your sid and runway assigned.

 

I do not know whether us pilots's will input the routes manually but I do not think so.

 

ProATC is NOT a "beta" product at least not like cs did it with the 777 and now L1011. You get your promised features and more features will come. Minor bug's get fixed pretty fast. You should enable log, register in the forums or write a supportmail to pointsoft and attach the log. Even on sunday's I got an answer to problems.

 

For SOP you have all features you want. Clearance, ground control, tower, departure, SID/STAR implementation, implementation for opusfsx, activesky, rex and I think the freeware FSRealWX is supported too. So you get the right runway and STAR assigned even with DWC. Even SID/STAR Transitions are supported now. Maybe rc is better for now, but the margin is going thinner and thinner.

Yes, if you import a flight from proatc it was (I say was because I don't know if it got fixed in recent version) a flyover waypoint. Normally the FMC computes the turn so you are on your way without much corrections as the turn begins let's say 2nm out of the waypoint. Flyover waypoints are waypoints, where you begin your turn after flying over it. For a right turn, you'll turn right, and then intercept your planned route with a left turn to be on course. My english isn't as good so it is difficult to explain for me.

 

I build my flights with FSBuild (also with flightsimcommander some time ago) and you can paste them into proatc. The wayfinding was inadequate because you had many direct to's but this got solved with last patch as far as I read.

 

I think the flightplan import feature is pretty good and real. Air Berlin here in germany has most routes programmed within their fmc's already. Mostly there are only some minor changes made manual. So by getting clearance from ATC and then use the co route function is pretty good. Especially because you get it imported without SID/STAR and runway. So you have to do the work after you get your sid and runway assigned.

 

I do not know whether us pilots's will input the routes manually but I do not think so.

 

ProATC is NOT a "beta" product at least not like cs did it with the 777 and now L1011. You get your promised features and more features will come. Minor bug's get fixed pretty fast. You should enable log, register in the forums or write a supportmail to pointsoft and attach the log. Even on sunday's I got an answer to problems.

 

For SOP you have all features you want. Clearance, ground control, tower, departure, SID/STAR implementation, implementation for opusfsx, activesky, rex and I think the freeware FSRealWX is supported too. So you get the right runway and STAR assigned even with DWC. Even SID/STAR Transitions are supported now. Maybe rc is better for now, but the margin is going thinner and thinner.

 

 

Hi!

One question: How can one import the flightplan WITHOUT the SID?

If I get clearance and thereafter import the XXXXXXXXCLR-flightplan into the FMC, it has the departure runway and the SID already in it.

Thanks in advance!

I've been thinking a little about ProATC/X and how good it is or not. I started thinking about this after posting that I can't fully recommend it and that it is too expensive but... that I won't fly the NGX without it. The thing is: you get used to what you've got. And when you are used to some great things and they have become normal, you start focusing on things that don't work as you would like and you start moaning about that alone while forgetting the good things... It seems, I have to admit, I've gotten so used to some ProATC/X options that I forgot how great they are. 

 

Like getting assigned a SID and STAR automatically at the appropriate time. I always had problems with SIDs and STARs (never knew which one to pick) and I never liked adding them to my plans even before taking off because in Europe they are assigned to you at the appropriate time. I LOVE that feature... but now I find that normal and I don't even think about it anymore. But in truth, it is AWESOME.

 

I also like how I can simply load the plan into the FMC after clearance. I didn't actually own one of the many planners that could do that. (I only load the initial plan btw and load the SID and STAR manually.)

 

I love NOT being vectored all over the bloody place anymore like FSX ATC does.

 

I love not being told to contact another controller 5 times in a minute as FSX ATC sometimes does.

 

I like the simple planner and how you can set the company, the gates, and those kind of options.

 

In short... there is a lot I love about this add-on and so saying that it isn't worth the money... well, that was a bit off, I think. For me, anyway. 

 

I still can't recommend it wholeheartedly because a lot of things don't work yet and I know a lot of people have huge problems with the software, but I have to take back what I have posted lately about ProATC/X. If I wouldn't, I would have to stop using it (in order to hold my integrity) , but I don't even want to think about doing that!  ^_^

 

 

Hi!

One question: How can one import the flightplan WITHOUT the SID?

If I get clearance and thereafter import the XXXXXXXXCLR-flightplan into the FMC, it has the departure runway and the SID already in it.

Thanks in advance!

 

 

In the options menu is an option called something like 'Add SID/STAR manually'. If you enable that one, the SID/STAR won't be added to the saved ProATC/X plan anymore.