PRO ATCX (Pointsoftware) forum site down

[ZKOKQ 984]

Good grief, VOX is flaky as well. Asked to contact Batislavia center, FO says "Speed Bird @ Runway 31R" ATC: "Speedbird 865, climb to FL380.

Runway 31R is 80nm behind me. Even the AI are reporting runways when in fact they are in the air.

One minute there is AI all around me, then there is nothing. Not for me.

 

Back to RC4 and PFE  for me

[ailchim 208]

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.

 

1) And that never happens with the default ATC?  Check where you are getting your weather from and make sure all your tools are using the same source data e.g. NOAA.  Make sure you update your weather system before starting ProATC-X.  Check your weather engine settings and block weather updates on the ground and on approach. Refresh your your AI traffic with the current weather before you start.  If you do the above you should get these problems no more frequently than with other set-ups.

 

2) This is a problem and as I understood it, one of the things that was supposed to be fixed in the next update. 

 

3) Don't use that as I fly the PMDG 737 in full screen which doesn't allow the taxi indicator to appear.  Have you run Makerunways and aligned the results within ProATC-X?  You have to re-do this every time you add new airport scenery or a new AFCAD.

 

4) That's almost certainly because you didn't go to the right runway entry point.  Have had that happen myself.  I assume you have to follow the AI to the FSX runway start position.  Do you have airports with crosswind runways enabled?  When ProATC-X gives you your STAR, check i) which runway it relates to and ii) the ProATC-X flightplan information available off the menu to ensure you the runway your are aiming for.

 

5) With ProATC-X you don't have to (and shouldn't) include your SID or STAR within your route.  That is the point, it is doing something different to some other tools in that it is allocating your departure and approach dynamically according to the weather, not setting both before you start,  subject to the usual problems with all set-ups as per 1) above.

[qqwertz 782]

1) And that never happens with the default ATC?  Check where you are getting your weather from ... 

 

3) Don't use that as I fly the PMDG 737 in full screen which doesn't allow the taxi indicator to appear.  Have you run Makerunways ...

 

4) That's almost certainly because you didn't go to the right runway entry point.  

 

5) With ProATC-X you don't have to (and shouldn't) include your SID or STAR within your route.  

Hi Ailchim,

 

I spent two months trying to get Pro-ATC to run properly before I decided that it isn't worth it. I tried all the tricks and hints and got help from other forum users, but I only had maybe 3-4 flights during that time when Pro-ATC performed to my satisfaction.

 

1) I never had issues with the default ATC. It just doesn't do SIDs/STARs. And yes, I triple-checked my weather source (AS2012) settings. The annoying thing is that Pro-ATC itself showed the correct weather (Metar) and nevertheless gave me the wrong runway. It appears that Pro-ATC determines the runway at the time when you plan the flight, not when you are actually performing the flight.

 

3) I am not using the taxi indicator, I am referring to the taxi clearance provided by Pro-ATC. And yes, I did run makerunways. Try taxiing to RWY 24L in CYUL. Pro-ATC sent me to a parking lot near RWY 24R instead.

 

4) That happened at CYUL as well, RWY 06R using the normal taxiway, which was also used by AI planes. My point is that Pro-ATC keeps contradicting itself: first a command to abandon t/o, then giving me clearance for t/o. The same happens with the runway selection (see point 1 above) and in other situations. 

 

5) I had no issues with SIDa/STARs in Pro-ATC, this worked as expected. I just pointed out a way to follow a SID/STAR without an ATC program.

 

Peter

[ailchim 208]

 

 

1) I never had issues with the default ATC. It just doesn't do SIDs/STARs. And yes, I triple-checked my weather source (AS2012) settings. The annoying thing is that Pro-ATC itself showed the correct weather (Metar) and nevertheless gave me the wrong runway. It appears that Pro-ATC determines the runway at the time when you plan the flight, not when you are actually performing the flight.
 
3) I am not using the taxi indicator, I am referring to the taxi clearance provided by Pro-ATC. And yes, I did run makerunways. Try taxiing to RWY 24L in CYUL. Pro-ATC sent me to a parking lot near RWY 24R instead.
 
4) That happened at CYUL as well, RWY 06R using the normal taxiway, which was also used by AI planes. My point is that Pro-ATC keeps contradicting itself: first a command to abandon t/o, then giving me clearance for t/o. The same happens with the runway selection (see point 1 above) and in other situations. 

 

1) We are all different aren't we, for me not doing SIDS & STARS is a no-no!

 

I guess if you use the ProATC-X route-planner and allow it to select & hard-code the SID and the departure runaway automatically, then you have to fly that flight plan while that weather is still valid.  It is after all made to create a flight plan whilst FSX is running and your chosen aircraft is sitting at the stand ready to go.  I don't do it that way,

 

I import each flight plan as a text string starting from the waypoint at the end of the SID and ending at the waypoint from which the STAR starts  e.g. if you are departing south west from Gatwick, irrespective of runway, all SID's lead to the Southampton (SAM) VOR.  If you are departing north east, they all go to Clacton (CLN).   If you are ARRIVING  at Gatwick from the north east, you start your STAR from Kopul irrespective of runway. I switch the ProATC-X auto SID & STARS off.  That way, when you load the flight, ProATC-X assigns the SID according to the weather at the time you fly, not the time you created the flightplan.  I believe departures & arrivals in the USA are done differently and maybe that causes a problem

2) Never done that to me unless I've got lost.  Finding the right taxi route is hard if the airport you are using doesn't have good signage.  The green line FSX draws on the taxiway is great although of course some hate it as ruining the realism!

 

3) Provided I've got to the right runway entry point and got TO clearance, ProATC never does that to me, so I'm stumped.  What was the last version of it you used?

[qqwertz 782]

1) We're on the same page, I also fly SIDs/STARs whenever possible. That part of Pro-ATC is fine (except for the weather issue in my case). I use Vatsim or VoxATC instead of Pro-ATC to do so.

 

2) I try to find taxiways using maps. 

 

3) The latest version of Pro-ATC

[wanabflyer 53]

Good grief, VOX is flaky as well. Asked to contact Batislavia center, FO says "Speed Bird @ Runway 31R" ATC: "Speedbird 865, climb to FL380.

Runway 31R is 80nm behind me. Even the AI are reporting runways when in fact they are in the air.

One minute there is AI all around me, then there is nothing. Not for me.

 

Back to RC4 and PFE  for me

This is definitely not what I wanted to hear Julian, I think a properly functioning ATC is becoming the new "Holy Grail" of flight Simming and just as elusive as the last (A smooth, fast FSX).

 

Regards,

[BillW 210]

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,

I have UT2 and seem to have had the same problems. I will wait to see if some patches come out or someone finds a fix. I put it off to the side for the time being. I have RC4, but I had some anomalies with it as well. They would seem to lose me in the air. I also got tired of the perpetually complaining controller.  

[Ray Proudfoot 8,961]

 

 

I have RC4, but I had some anomalies with it as well. They would seem to lose me in the air. I also got tired of the perpetually complaining controller.

 

Bill, RC4 can occasionally not credit you for passing a waypoint if you're slow to ack a traffic message when you're crossing one. When you find yourself in that position just press 9 and request Direct To. Easy peasy lemon squeezy! :biggrin:

 

The controller will only complain if you don't fly what you file. Every ATC program worth its salt will do that. :wink:

[BillW 210]

Bill, RC4 can occasionally not credit you for passing a waypoint if you're slow to ack a traffic message when you're crossing one. When you find yourself in that position just press 9 and request Direct To. Easy peasy lemon squeezy! :biggrin:

 

The controller will only complain if you don't fly what you file. Every ATC program worth its salt will do that. :wink:

Do I denote a twinge of bias here? LOL!

[Ray Proudfoot 8,961]

Do I denote a twinge of bias here? LOL!

 

Absolutely not. I don't gain financially if you choose RC4 over a rival product. I was just pointing out how to overcome the problem you described.

[wanabflyer 53]

Bill, RC4 can occasionally not credit you for passing a waypoint if you're slow to ack a traffic message when you're crossing one. When you find yourself in that position just press 9 and request Direct To. Easy peasy lemon squeezy! :biggrin:

 

The controller will only complain if you don't fly what you file. Every ATC program worth its salt will do that. :wink:

There is a little bit more to it than that Ray, I've been barked at because I couldn't descend a 747 through 10,000 ft in two minutes and sometimes it is forgotten that a simmer doesn't have a FO to help out during high work load times, at least not until recently where there are more and more programs offering FO assistance. I have listened to hours of ATC chatter and never heard the level of testiness that RC4 controllers give you ☺️.

 

Having said that, I do agree that procedurally RC4 is about the best out there.

 

Regards,

[Ray Proudfoot 8,961]

 

 

There is a little bit more to it than that Ray, I've been barked at because I couldn't descend a 747 through 10,000 ft in two minutes and sometimes it is forgotten that a simmer doesn't have a FO to help out during high work load times, at least not until recently where there are more and more programs offering FO assistance

 

Rick, if you're having to descend 10,000ft in 2 minutes it does suggest something has gone wrong with your descent profile. I can honestly say I can't remember the last time that happened to me, if ever. But I fly a 737-900, not a 747. Shouldn't make any difference though if the CDU and plan is setup correctly. Do you add a fix in the CDU for 40 miles from arrival with an altitude of FL120 / 12,000ft?

 

There isn't a FO but you can hand comms over to Otto. I do that right after t/off clearance. Leaves me to fly the plane.

 

 

 

I have listened to hours of ATC chatter and never heard the level of testiness that RC4 controllers give you ☺️.

Mostly, it's when you're instructed to climb to a new FL or descend. If Otto has comms he will ack it straight away. Better for you to have them and then you can delay the ack until after you have initiated the action.

 

Having said that, I do agree that procedurally RC4 is about the best out there.

That's what sells it. I agree the interface isn't state of the art but as you need to look at it so infrequently that's not a big issue really. And for voices? I can live with them quite easily - even my own. But that's subjective.

[BillW 210]

Absolutely not. I don't gain financially if you choose RC4 over a rival product. I was just pointing out how to overcome the problem you described.

I was kidding about the controller. All in fun.

[Ray Proudfoot 8,961]

I was kidding about the controller. All in fun.

No offence taken Bill. It's hard sometimes to gauge the tone of a message. :smile:

[cjcdrummond 2]

Keep getting this message over past few days..... any answers?

 

General Error

SQL ERROR [ mysqli ]

Table './db1075950@002dproatcxforumdbx/bb3f_users' is marked as crashed and last (automatic?) repair failed [144]

An sql error occurred while fetching this page. Please contact an administrator if this problem persists.