PRO ATCX (Pointsoftware) forum site down

[Damien 4]

I tried the free trial offer 3 years ago and couldn't get it to work (for me) with UT2, but as I said, if things work out I might just get my credit card out again.

 

I'm currently evaluating VoxATC. The way I understand the way it runs, It doesn't work with UT2. The manual states you need to shut off traffic and VoxATC will make it's own traffic that it gives direction to. That said,  Instructions work but it's practically working off a script. For example you depart the airport for local flight, you notify tower that you're leaving the airspace and tower responds with giving you permission to land, not clearance to change frequency to center. I'll be deleting voxATC today. 

 

-Damien

[qqwertz 800]

Is the program totally unusable or has it just not achieved the perfection we all desire?

Stay away from Pro-ATC. In its current state even the default FSX ATC is more useful. And I must say I am completely appalled by the FSCOM 2004 story, It appears the Pro-ATC developer has released a similarly dysfunctional program 9 years ago, I have now lost any hope that he will ever fix Pro-ATC.

 

I will use VoxATC instead. It works fine and there is a demo version for it to check it out.

 

Peter

[BillW 213]

I did find it slightly odd that Clive has been active over on the aerosoft pfpx forum but not on the Pro-Atc forum. My copy of Pro atc is now also shelved. I've gone back to radar contact for my offline flights. I to wish I had done more research before buying, I like many others never knew the developer had done similar in the past.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

+1. I joined the long line of ripped off customers. I will be more wary of reviews and sales pitches in the future.

[mr340 56]

Lovely. I just purchsed pro-atx yesterday, received the unlock code immediately but - do not get any response to unlocking attempts. Neither online, nor per e-mail. Not in the forum (down again). I will allow reaction time until end of next business day, then catch up with legal. And, of course, I will keep all available forums informed - I think that is the best way for us to deal with such issues.

 

Have a good Sunday

Gerold

That is why i wait for reviews an several update before purchasing any addon, an avsim is the best web to look for positive an negative reiviews from a flight sim product.  When i first saw this product release i think it was a fellow simmer name Chuck who first post it if am not mistaken. I saw very good reviews an was about to purchase it but then i said oh am going to wait for several more updates.  Everyone had very high  hopes for this product .  By the way do you use paypal to checkout when purchasing this product ?

[ailchim 216]

Stay away from Pro-ATC. In its current state even the default FSX ATC is more useful.

 

The above is incorrect if as I do you  fly IFR airliners in Europe.  Outside that, I cannot say.

 

This product works correctly for me every time.  It allocates SIDS & STARS dynamically according to the weather and allows you to fly them with altitude restrictions as per the charts without constant hassle regarding vectors and altitudes if not flight-plan cancellation.  How that makes FSX ATC more useful is beyond me.

 

It's biggest failing is the lack of control over taxi-ing AI on the ground which can create taxiway conflicts.  It does manage your departure in recognition of other traffic.  It doesn't control AI on the ground during approach very well but then, neither does the FSX default.   

 

If you are doing the same flying as me and ProATC-X doesn't work for you, I'd respectfully suggest you are doing something wrong on the basis that it does work for me and I'm no genius.

 

I can't comment on RC4 or VOXATC which I decided against on the basis of robotic voices and no ongoing development in the first case and cost in the second case.  I have not used those products.  They may be far superior but I'm not dissatisfied with ProATC-X as it stands.

 

That said, it will be a serious let down it If the promised upgrades don't appear.  Nevertheless, I can well see why the developer is keeping his head down given the antagonistic tone of this & other threads.  

 

I have no great interest in an "failed" attempt to achieve voice recognition ATC 7 years ago.  That strikes me as being a step too far.  I hope that isn't what the developer is trying to do presently. as It would be far better to finalise the product without voice recognition first.  

 

I don't know if any of the faults in FSComm were ever rectified but certainly the main two criticisms

 

1) being unable to fly the route without missed way-points and

2) not allowing easy entry of accurate flight-plans

 

don't apply to ProATC-X. 

[wanabflyer 53]

 

I will use VoxATC instead. It works fine and there is a demo version for it to check it out.

 

Peter

BillW, as you can read, I am thinking of getting VoxATC, so what are your thoughts on what Damien (post #61) has to say. I know I can retry the demo, but you can't always get the full picture in 7-days. I did have a UT2 problem the first time I tried it, but I'm on MTX now.

 

Being as I have already been stung for $70+, I would like to be a little more cautious before puting out even more cash.

 

Sorry, not trying change the topic, as I do agree with all of you guys and like everyone, I am waiting with eager anticipation as to what the developer and his supporters (they know who they are) has to say.

 

Regards,

[wanabflyer 53]

The above is incorrect if as I do you  fly IFR airliners in Europe.  Outside that, I cannot say.

 

This product works correctly for me every time.  It allocates SIDS & STARS dynamically according to the weather and allows you to fly them with altitude restrictions as per the charts without constant hassle regarding vectors and altitudes if not flight-plan cancellation.  How that makes FSX ATC more useful is beyond me.

 

Can I have a copy of your version!

 

Regards,

[ailchim 216]

I assure you, other than making sure I have a solid flight plan in the first place (VATAware mostly) I'm doing nothing clever!

 

• Make sure you have the same Navdata in ProATC-X as you have in anything else you use, particularly the FMC
• Run MakeRunways etc as per the manual
• Paste the flight-plan text string into ProATC-X, make sure it's picked up the airways properly, which it does 9 times out of 10 or better,
• Key the same flight-plan into the FMC
• Away you go.

[wanabflyer 53]

<p>I assure you, other than making sure I have a solid flight plan in the first place (VATAware mostly) I'm doing nothing clever! 

• Make sure you have the same Navdata in ProATC-X as you have in anything else you use, particularly the FMC
• Run MakeRunways etc as per the manual
• Paste the flight-plan text string into ProATC-X, make sure it's picked up the airways properly, which it does 9 times out of 10 or better,
• Key the same flight-plan into the FMC
• Away you go.

If you want to know how an ATC program should work as far as procedure and accuracy when vectoring or issuing altitude assignments to name a couple of attributes, then try RC4. The only reason I moved on from using it was to find a program that uses SIDS & STARS and my own personal pet peeve, that being when it barks at you if you do not respond to instruction in a short period of time. What I want was and still is advertised on PATC web site and this is where you and I will have to agree to disagree. PATC in its present state does not deliver and I am still waiting (almost 7-months) for this to happen.

 

Tomorrow is fine, but bare in mind tomorrow never comes.

 

Best Regards,

[ailchim 216]

I certainly won't be forking out on a second ATC program what with (perhaps) P3D becoming an option and the fact my PC is in need of updating (if I'm allowed to spend my own money that way)!

 

Perhaps in addition to procedural differences between the US or the rest of the world, what lies behind some of the debate is the level of knowledge people have of real world rules and phraseology. I try to fly as accurately as I can but I have absolutely no real world flight experience.  Therefore perhaps I'm not offended by errors I'm not even aware of whereas others are more knowledgeable and spot mistakes I don't,  That sort of problem wouldn't justify a comment that it doesn't work though. 

 

I stand by what I say: given the way I fly, it works for me, may be not for others and not perfectly (I forgot to mention the absence of far too many callsigns) but far better than the FSX default.

 

I don't get barked at BTW so I don't know what you're doing to annoy it......  Although I don't use the co-pilot for much as I have FS2Crew, but I do use him to answer radio calls.  I believe (although I don't know) that this is as per real-life and it has the advantage that once you are in the cruise, you can step away from the PC and let it get on with it.

[wanabflyer 53]

I don't get barked at BTW so I don't know what you're doing to annoy it......

I was referring to RC4 with regard to ATC barking at me.

 

That sort of problem wouldn't justify a comment that it doesn't work though.

 

There is a difference between "it doesn't work" & "it doesn't work as advertised"

 

Regards,

[ailchim 216]

1) Sorry, I misunderstood

2) As you say, we'll agree to differ.

[Jim Padgett 11]

I use PATCx with no real issues.. it does have bugs, but I can still use it and I like what it does.

[ZKOKQ 986]

@Alchim. Have you tried PATC in New Zealand ? I do 50% of my flying in NZ and PATC does not work, full stop. It requests freq change every 7 - 10 seconds, and if you look at the sector map in PATC, you will see it has about 200 sectors, it should only have about 5. I am glad you are happy with it.

I asked repeatedly for Mourad to have a look, and it was ignored.

 

You also posted that Mourad is keeping his head down because of negativity, if he posted an update on his plans, there would be no negativity. This occasion, it is the Developer in the spotlight, not the end user.

Crikey, even Clive (Alpha117) had it away on his toes, no explanation, nothing. I am convinced he knew something we did not at the time. Good of him to stick up for his fellow flight simmers.

[qqwertz 800]

The above is incorrect if as I do you  fly IFR airliners in Europe.  Outside that, I cannot say.

 

This product works correctly for me every time.

Hi Ailchim,

 

good for you. I spent two agonizing months trying to get Pro-ATC to run properly. Among the most notorious errors that I encountered were

 

- Being assigned a runway WITH the wind. I verified the weather conditions within Pro-ATC itself (!!) and it still insisted on the wrong runway.

- Utter disregard of AI traffic on the ground. Pro-ATC gave me clearance with a plane waiting for t/o just in front of me (and 30 seconds earlier it told me that I was #2)

- T/O clearance even when a plane was just about to land on the runway.

- Taxi instructions to the runway that literally ended somewhere in the meadows.

- My worst experience was when Pro-ATC didn't react at all when I was on the runway, then told me to abandon t/o when I was accelerating, and then gave me t/o clearance when I was on the runway exit.

 

I managed to master many other annoyances like descent instructions 250nm out, Pro-ATC crashes, or importing a flight plan from a proper flight planning program, but I really think the default ATC does a better job. If I want to fly a SID/STAR I can load that in Aivlasoft's EFB, which transfers it to the default GPS. For me that is more reliable than what Pro-ATC offers.

 

Oh, and I fly IFR in North America and Europe most of the time.

 

Cheers,

Peter

what are your thoughts on what Damien (post #61) has to say. I know I can retry the demo, but you can't always get the full picture in 7-days. I did have a UT2 problem the first time I tried it, but I'm on MTX now.

Hi Wanabflyer,

 

I am using UT2 as well. VoxATC uses the model sets but not the AI flight plans. It appears to me that VoxATC simply removes all AI traffic in the air that may be in conflict with your path. I am saying this because (i) I always only see planes behind me when in the air and (ii) VoxATC uses model sets that are appropriate for the region (like Air Canada when in Toronto).

 

The way VoxATC handles AI traffic isn't perfect, and this was the reason why I made the ill-advised decision to try Pro-ATC. In all other respects VoxATC worked flawlessly for me.

 

Somebody else above complained about the "robotic" voice sets. However, you can use third-party voices and then VoxATC sounds really nice.

 

Cheers,

Peter