Basic wont do it

 

Its basically dead in the water

 

BTW other than schooling intros does anything get done in Basic anymore?

ProATC is 50 EUR?  Holy crap... I thought RC4 was expensive at $45 USD.  No way in hell would I pay 50EUR for that program, let alone $50.

 

Even so, I tend to favor ProATC over VoxATC when flying to airports with high terrain. VoxATC is almost perfect, but it vectores me to a mountain 9 out of 10 times. So does RC4.

 

In RC4, it sounds like you need to learn what the NOTAM function is.  It is specifically designed for use in mountainous areas.

whos to say 50 euro is not the beta pricing. Yea thats expensive, but if they have big plans for this to work properly and it eventually does work quite well, then that demands an even more premium price. Who knows. 

 

Up until May, there was frequent updates, and yes they did listen to you to an extent. Sure the communicative skills isnt the best, but I always got a reply within 24 hours by email from Mourad addressing my concerns to the best of his ability.  I think the biggest problem with Proatc is a project of this magnitude is extremely difficult with one person doing it all. Yes Clive does alot on the side, but hes not the programmer. Perhaps Mourad is just overwhelmed at the demand for realism. When proatc was reading STARS from Europe, they dont have transitions really like here in N America, and the program really wasnt dynamic enough to differentiate between the two. This is also related to poor vectoring. 

 

This is again another problem. Too may different standards across the world.  Human controlling is obviously dynamic and changes on the fly whereas a program of this nature is linear. Its just going to follow the instructions and that is it period. 

 

While still frustrating, the users who do use it hopefully provide enough feedback of how things should be. 

If only had a couple more programmers with him, this would probably move along alot quicker. 

 

This is in active development. Something to be said as the others are dead. 

I wish and hope for the best that it does come together. 

Even so, I tend to favor ProATC over VoxATC when flying to airports with high terrain.

Two day ago while flying to KSFO, PATC vectored me right into a mountain by issuing descent instructions far too early. Luckily I ignored ATC.

 

Edit: this one I assume is fixable, given that although it is not my favourite, RC4 never did this in the years that I used it before switching to PATC.

In RC4, it sounds like you need to learn what the NOTAM function is. It is specifically designed for use in mountainous areas.

I have used it, but it doesn't fix the vectoring in high terrain environment. It just stops ATC from screaming at you if you stop your descent at some point.

 

Even with NOTAM's on, RC4 has tried to vector my through a mountain to the FAF. With NOTAMs on, I can clear the mountain tops at, say 11000ft, without ATC yelling at me, but... I would have to descend to 2000ft in couple of miles to be stabilized for approach. Might work if you jumped out of the aircraft, but the aircraft won't be able to reach the FAF with me

 

Other than that, I like RC4 for it's accurate phraseology.

Two day ago while flying to KSFO, PATC vectored me right into a mountain by issuing descent instructions far too early. Luckily I ignored ATC.

Have you checked your log file for errors about elevation requests? I had a similar problem, I was asked to descend 5000ft below the destination airfield elevation. BUT looking at the log file I noticed that ProATC's elevation request over the internet had failed (even tough it was able to download METARs).

 

I was able to track down the problem to my firewall. When I disabled the firewall, ProATC was able to read the elevation data from the internet and my problem was solved.

I was able to track down the problem to my firewall. When I disabled the firewall, ProATC was able to read the elevation data from the internet and my problem was solved.

Strange, I posted this incident on the PATC forum and got no suggestions, so thanks for this. I will check it out.

 

Regards,