..mind when comparing products does the one you're looking at do the following?

 

• Aborted take-off
• In-flight emergencies
• Spoken airline names. i.e. Speedbird and not 'British Airways'
• Nearly 300 spoken airport names
• ICAO and FAA rules adhered to

I am no expert, recent user; however in response to the above, the VoxATC manual states

 This version of VoxATC has five types of emergency currently defined, these are:

  engine failure

  fuel low

  hydraulic failure

  avionics failure

  passenger critically ill

You can make any standard request, but will most frequently want vectors to the nearest suitable

airport.

 

Again from the manual:

 The code used to designate a procedure (SID/STAR), is usually an abbreviated form of the

   procedure name. VoxATC must translate this to the designation that will be used in ATC comms.

 This process is not perfect and in some cases, can produce incorrect spoken designations. The

 Procedure Pronunciation Editor allows for the definition of replacements for unpronounceable

 parts of a procedure name on an airport by airport basis.

 Load Airport

   To start, select Load Airport on the menu and enter the ICAO code of the airport into the displayed

   dialog. A tree view on the left side of the form displays the airport name and two sub items SIDS

   and STARS

 

Again from the manual

Flying in UK / European Airspace

VoxATC uses different phraseology and procedures when you are flying in the UK or Europe.

Frequencies are given using 'decimal' instead of 'point'.

QNH and QFE are used for altimeter setting.

The transition altitude is 3500.

'Pass your message' replaces 'go ahead'

'Ready for departure' replaces 'ready for takeoff'.

A UK supplement is available that adds LARS, DACS, MATZ and FISO and A/G phraseology,

see VoxATC.com for further information

 

 

SO I hope you can see it is a fairly comprehensive effort

Again, just from a user , no company affiliation

I have to agree about VATSIM.  Everything else falls well short of the experience.  I wish I'd have used VATSIM years earlier, and to be honest I don't have a good reason why I didn't.  The only time I fly offline now is when I'm learning a new aircraft (presently the Dash 8 Q400).

 

Fear of the Mic quickly fades, and the learning curve isn't nearly what people make it out to be. Plus, there are several organizations which can help reduce the learning curve.

 

If you truly want to maximize your experience, VATSIM is the thing.

 

Take the plunge!

Radar Contact has been in the community for years.  It was co-devloped by a real world FAA Controller.  There are many aspects of ATC that most in the community don't even have the vagust understanding of the "tons" of rules.  Yes there are things that we want the next version of Radar Contact to use such as STAR and SID reconition.  But for the present, NO program comes as close to real world ATC than Radar Contact.  I use it on EVERY flight. 

 

Yes we have promised that we are working on the next version and that has been a very long promise, but it is coming.  This is one aspect of the flight sim community that I don't understand.  When someing is working and is correct, why do people still look for somehting else.

 

Bob

 

 

Was the development resumed?

After REX loads you need to refresh the AI Traffic system.

Thanks Jim!  Could you refresh my memory and tell me how to refresh the AI traffic system in FSX?

 

Airbus

I am no expert, recent user; however in response to the above, the VoxATC manual states

 This version of VoxATC has five types of emergency currently defined, these are: ...

SO I hope you can see it is a fairly comprehensive effort

Again, just from a user , no company affiliation

 

Thanks for posting that Ben. My post wasn't meant to be a competition between RC4 and VoxATC can do. More of an assist to anyone thinking of buying an ATC package.

Was the development resumed?

 

As of today not yet, but a beta tested of RC quoted earlier that there should be a statement from John Dekkar (excuse misspelling of name) on July first. He also mentioned that version 5 is coming. Prolly a year or so at least..

If you want close to real life in a program there is only one choice ... VOXATC.

 

When your flying for real and talking to ATC it can add to your work-load, VOXATC replicates this work-load in a realistic way as you are cominicating via voice, sorry pressing keyboard keys via a on-screen menu just doesnt do it for me.

 

The main drawback is the cost, its probably the most expensive single item of software you will buy ... But ... it is worth it. It comes with four TTS voices which are good and there are other voices out there which work well with it and are very very good.

 

Taxing is via lights on the taxiway centre line which is nice. One tip, it only displays taxi route lights if there is a ground freq in use.

 

You must use a flight plan which can be a pain but lets be honest it has to have info on where you want to go!

 

Uses any add-on traffic to inject its own traffic, my tip would be to use Traffic X & stay away from UT2 only because of the default deadalus textures UT2 uses if it cant find the required airline.

 

If you are serious about wanting real ATC get VOXATC, you'l want to fly with it every flight.

Thanks Jim!  Could you refresh my memory and tell me how to refresh the AI traffic system in FSX?

 

Airbus

 

There may be an option in REX to do this automatically. If not, change to time once a flight is loaded + or - 2 minutes.

When your flying for real and talking to ATC it can add to your work-load, VOXATC replicates this work-load in a realistic way as you are cominicating via voice, sorry pressing keyboard keys via a on-screen menu just doesnt do it for me.

 

Both RC4 and PFE can be controlled by voice when used with MCE. (I can only speak for PFE here, but it works very well with this combination.)

 

Taxing is via lights on the taxiway centre line which is nice. One tip, it only displays taxi route lights if there is a ground freq in use.

 

PFE does this by voice, which is more realistic, and works very well. (There is also an optional gauge which has an arrow pointing in the direction you should go. (Has to be installed in each aircraft manually in the panel.cfg file) I personally don't see a need for it.

If you want close to real life in a program there is only one choice ... VOXATC.

...

Uses any add-on traffic to inject its own traffic

I assume you mean that it uses the supplied traffic models and injects them with its own plans and time schedules? Does it produce a realistic level of traffic ... that was really my main complaint / worry. I do like a busy airport and busy skies. I would also want it to use the correct gates where there are those assigned for selected airlines, and of course the airliners to fly from and to reasonably realistic airports for that carrier.

 

If it does all that I'd be more interested than I was, but one other thing concerns me -- I read that it has one fixed (?) transition altitude for Europe, 3500 feet? That can't be right, surely? Even in the UK the TAs vary from 3000 to 6000, most are 5000 and 6000, and some European airports would be very odd using such a low TA. Madrid and Innsbruck spring straight to mind, but there must be many others.

 

ProATC/X and Radar Contact both use an editable file detailing the individual TAs for each airport.

 

Regards

Pete

Hi Guys,<br /><br />I'm also in the process of deciding which program is best to replace default ATC. Here are my questions. As many of you are aware (and from reading the forums, some of you are not), aircraft are almost ALWAYS taken off the STAR (usually within about 10 miles of the airport) and vectored for sequencing onto the final approach course of the IAP in use. Do any of the addon ATC programs replicate this? Better yet, for Europe (and to a lesser extent in the U.S), do any simulate the holding at stacking points on the STAR that often occurs during busy traffic periods? Thanks.

I find that VOX does this similar to what I experience on VATSIM. VOX controls the AI traffic so you'll find it getting vectored and responding to same as well as yourself.

 

Like I said I find VOXATC and VATSIM to be complimentary to each other.

 

 

As many of you are aware (and from reading the forums, some of you are not), aircraft are almost ALWAYS taken off the STAR (usually within about 10 miles of the airport) and vectored for sequencing onto the final approach course of the IAP in use. Do any of the addon ATC programs replicate this? Better yet, for Europe (and to a lesser extent in the U.S), do any simulate the holding at stacking points on the STAR that often occurs during busy traffic periods?

 

RC4 gives you an option at 40 miles from the arrival airport. You can either follow Approach vectors (default) or choose the IAP option that allows you the freedom to fly whatever approach you wish and your next contact will be with Tower on finals.

 

RC4 does have a holding option but it's not very realistic. The final waypoint in your plan must be a VOR for it to become available. As that seldom applies to my flights I've never tried it. Any ATC program that was more flexible in this respect would be attractive for me. After all, how many inbounds to Heathrow get immediate clearance? It just doesn't happen any more.

Hi Guys,<br /><br />I'm also in the process of deciding which program is best to replace default ATC. Here are my questions. As many of you are aware (and from reading the forums, some of you are not), aircraft are almost ALWAYS taken off the STAR (usually within about 10 miles of the airport) and vectored for sequencing onto the final approach course of the IAP in use. Do any of the addon ATC programs replicate this? Better yet, for Europe (and to a lesser extent in the U.S), do any simulate the holding at stacking points on the STAR that often occurs during busy traffic periods? Thanks.

 

ProATC/X usually let's you fly towards the last waypoint of the STAR after which it tells you to intercept the localizer... no matter where you are or where you are heading... you are left completely on your own out there. Holds aren't supported.

Hi Guys,<br /><br />I'm also in the process of deciding which program is best to replace default ATC. Here are my questions. As many of you are aware (and from reading the forums, some of you are not), aircraft are almost ALWAYS taken off the STAR (usually within about 10 miles of the airport) and vectored for sequencing onto the final approach course of the IAP in use. Do any of the addon ATC programs replicate this? Better yet, for Europe (and to a lesser extent in the U.S), do any simulate the holding at stacking points on the STAR that often occurs during busy traffic periods? Thanks.

 

As for PFE, it also has the option to fly Cleared To Final At Pilot's Discretion or you can define the SID/STAR in the flightplan, and fly it that way. PROATC/X is the only option that I know of that can assign SIDS/STARS dynamically in flight based on change of wind. One thing that PFE can do, is issue change of runway assignments dynamically based on wind change or traffic.