FSX-MS Pro-Atc or Radar Contact?

[Ray Proudfoot 8,947]

You guys are crazy for not flying online. All of these programs are toys in comparison, and they do not really simulate air traffic control accurately enough to be used with high fidelity simulations in my opinion. Don't be scared, educate yourself and start flying online today

 

Hmmm, interesting viewpoint. So RC4 - designed with input from professional Air Traffic Controllers both from the US and Britain - is classed as a 'toy'. Do on-line controllers have a professional background or any qualifications apart from the internal tests they have to take?

 

And what chance is there when I'm descending into Dubai at 0300 local time there will be an approach controller to give me vectors? Virtually none I suspect. I'm sure that many people get enjoyment from VatSim etc. but you have to rely on humans being on-line and that isn't always the case. RC4 and the other programs look after you at any time of day or night including Christmas Day. :smile:

 

Finally, I believe on-line flying requires you to deactivate any traffic package you have. Taxiing around big airports with little other traffic can't be much fun although I accept it will help frame rates.

 

Oh, and one more thing. If I'm flying on-line and the door bell goes I presume I can't press 'pause' whilst I try to get rid of the Jehovah's Witnesses? :lol:

 

 

I believe RC, you need to setup the SID/STARS in your flightplan ahead of time. Done right it works pretty well.

 

Agreed although regarding the STAR when you contact App at 40 miles out you can request to fly an IAP approach. You're then left to your own devices until you're about 7 miles out when you're instructed to contact Tower. I often choose that option and it works well.

[Oli 1]

I believe RC, you need to setup the SID/STARS in your flightplan ahead of time.

 

Not in Radar Contact - just fill your flight plan in a regular way (first point being last point of SID).

IF your first waypoint is more than 30 miles from the departure airport, you have a choice, when you setup your flight, of using a SID or being vectored to this 1st waypoint

IF it is less than 30 miles from the departure airport, then you can only be vectored.

 

When you choose to use a SID, Radar contact indiquates it in the clearance and you are free to flight anyway you want as long as you reach this first waypoint - this is easy and practical, even if it does not assign you a SID, the choice of SID is up to you (but you do not often have many choices).

 

Same with instrument approach - if you want to use a instrument approach, it will leave you alone until you are aligned with the ILS - this is a big difference between RC and real, RC does not recognize mountains so, in a mountain surrounded airport, it can vector you straight into the ground. If you fly to Innsbruck for instance, you want to make an instrument approach.

 

 

Thanks,

 

Olivier

[Drumcode 1,893]

Everything that is currently available out there sounds like a total garbage. I cannot believe that up until today there's no state of the art (PMDG like) ATC add-on available, apart from Radar Contact which is probably the best option at this time.

[nam1394 10]

Fighting talk! :biggrin:  I assume PFE can handle aborted take-offs and emergencies both immediately after take-off and enroute with an option to divert to an alternative airport?

 

No, it doesn't handle RTO, but it does handle enroute emergencies. As it has been said so many times in this thread, each add on has  its pros and cons. Does RC give taxi instructions? No, it doesn't and it has its other flaws. Also, a major flaw with RC is destination ATIS. I am using FSGRW for weather and it works with PFE, PROATX, and the default. I never get the wrong runway except with RC.

 

RC was the first ATC add on I used and it is a good ATC add on but after trying PFE I thought it was a better one. 

 

To OP, choose what is best for you after reading respective forums and reviews. There are people here with strong opinions about their prefered ATC. A good example, the poster who said that we are all crazy, because we have different opinion than theirs! :rolleyes:

 

I, myself, prefers PFE but I am not sure would. You might prefer RC or PROATCx or maybe the default. Whatever you choose, I certainly won't call you crazy   

[Pe11e 812]

Everything that is currently available out there sounds like a total garbage. I cannot believe that up until today there's no state of the art (PMDG like) ATC add-on available, apart from Radar Contact which is probably the best option at this time.

 

Blame FSX, not developers of ATC add-ons.

[Drumcode 1,893]

Blame FSX, not developers of ATC add-ons.

 

Oh, I'm not blaming anyone, just stating the fact. heh

[Ray Proudfoot 8,947]

 

 

No, it doesn't handle RTO, but it does handle enroute emergencies. As it has been said so many times in this thread, each add on has its pros and cons. Does RC give taxi instructions? No, it doesn't and it has its other flaws. Also, a major flaw with RC is destination ATIS. I am using FSGRW for weather and it works with PFE, PROATX, and the default. I never get the wrong runway except with RC.

Taxi Instructions were being coded in v5 when everything ground to a halt. But should JD start again rest assured it will be there.

 

I haven't come across the problem you describe in RC4. It simply reads the weather stored in FS. It may depend on which weather program you use. In Active Sky 6.5 there's an option to lock the weather x miles out. if I have that selected that may be why the winds don't change from contacting App to landing. See if your program has that option.

 

RC was the first ATC add on I used and it is a good ATC add on but after trying PFE I thought it was a better one.

Fair enough. There's no right or wrong decision.

[nam1394 10]

Taxi Instructions were being coded in v5 when everything ground to a halt. But should JD start again rest assured it will be there.

 

 

I will be the first to buy it. RC's support is one of the best of all around ATC. I, really, hope he does release RC 5.

[severniae 78]

I wouldn't count on it - latest post from JD himself said that he's put v5 on hold indefinitely. From what he said I'd highly doubt that he'll return to coding it. Not impossible though.... 

[Sportsfan23 2]

So many opinions on this. Now I am even more confused about which program to get. Of the 3 main programs being discussed here which are still being updated and improved upon if any?

 

I guess my choice is down to PFE and RC4 even though it appears it's not being developed anymore.

[Ray Proudfoot 8,947]

I can only speak for RC4. It's been out for 7 years and is stable. Whilst development on v5 has stopped v4 is more than capable of enhancing IFR flights over the default FSX.

 

There is a Radar Contact forum here on AvSim. Have a read of a few threads. It remains supported and seems to satisfy most users requirements. I never fly without it. :smile:

[spesimen 135]

None of the ATC manage a/c separation. You have to add something like AI smooth for that. And no default ATC as already said does not do SIDs or STARs in any shape or form.

 

 

 

voxAtc does manage a/c separation. instead of using the built-in AI it creates it's own. the AI aircraft will wait before getting cleared to cross runways and will typically fly SIDs out of airports too. it works great with the UT2 package and has a custom bridge which imports those aircraft. 

So many opinions on this. Now I am even more confused about which program to get. Of the 3 main programs being discussed here which are still being updated and improved upon if any?

 

I guess my choice is down to PFE and RC4 even though it appears it's not being developed anymore.

 

voxATC is still being updated, they recently added p3d support.

it has a free demo so it's easy to see for yourself if you like it!

 

i think rc4 is a very good choice also, although as the original poster said, they were looking for sid/star support which it doesn't really have. 

 

cheers

-andy crosby

[Q_flyer 766]

You guys are crazy for not flying online. All of these programs are toys in comparison, and they do not really simulate air traffic control accurately enough to be used with high fidelity simulations in my opinion. Don't be scared, educate yourself and start flying online today

 

I think for most, it's nothing whatsoever to do with being 'scared'.

 

When I was younger, with no kids and few responsibilties, I used to fly 4 hour flights all real-time, on VATSIM, in targetted areas with full coverage.  I'll never forget my first fully ATC controlled approach on VATSIM, it was at Dubrovnik in Croatia, and the VATSIM controller did an awesome job.  I was jaw-dropped and gobsmacked :cool:

 

.....but.... I never ever use VATSIM now because it is quite an undertaking to get set up, get your FP all done and logged, have your charts and/or know your proper departure and arrival stuff, and to be at the PC throughout the whole flight.         I dream of having that time and freedom now!

 

So for some, VATSIM - with all it entails, with how brilliant it can be - will never be for them.

[vololiberista 205]

You guys are crazy for not flying online. All of these programs are toys in comparison, and they do not really simulate air traffic control accurately enough to be used with high fidelity simulations in my opinion. Don't be scared, educate yourself and start flying online today

Since when has a controller "always" been available at both departure and destination airports plus en-route?

Extremely rarely!

[Ircghost 1]

I practically only fly on IVAO network and since I'm Dutch usually in the NL, UK, DE, AU area. I often have ATC, but obviously not always. I always enable AI traffic (with GAIT) to make to everything a bit busier and when there is no atc to guide me I use the default ATC to guide me a bit, but more to emulate some ATC. The nice thing is that you can just ignore it if you don't want to use it when an actual ATC'er comes online. So yeah, I might be cheating a little bit that way but I'm justr trying to make the best of my situation.

 

I do not know how VATSIM does it, but on IVAO if there is only someone in APP he/she will take all other positions as well. So you have full start-up to departure guidance...

And if you want to do a nice flight with a lot of atc just check where a lot of atc is at the moment (http://webeye.ivao.aero/) and/or quickly check the ATC reservation system to see where who is going to be online. It may sound like too much effort but after you bookmarked the right links, I can check that in under 20 seconds.

 

I also made a screenshot of the current ATC:

http://tweakers.net/ext/f/qWBVAM9uNJ7ZYuRLeLTYdamc/full.jpg