As most on here will know, it's rare for me to react to posts like this, but the above statement doesn't just sound "like crap", it IS crap!

 

i have most ATC products released for FS9 & FSX. I've had each one since its initial release.

 

Excluding default ATC, PFE is BY FAR the least robotic sound.  It also includes a multitude of accents.

 

Whatever you say.

 

 

the thing that gets me is why a developer would do this to ruin his reputation? I own pro atc x and I like the progrqm for what it is but user to user support and the dev not showing in the forums notvproviding updates etc..

 

Possibly because he thinks the product is working as it stands (it does for me) and there is, as someone above noted, a user community, including some it appears with an inside track to the developer, providing basic support.

 

Possibly because he is genuinely working on a major upgrade and, a la PMDG, can't be bothered to deal endlessly with people's questions about release dates.

 

Possibly not of of course but there doesn't seem a lot of point in continually saying "I'm doing it, OK? As fast as I can, OK?"

 

Just because a lot of people ask a question doesn't mean there's a worthwhile answer to be given.

VOXATC is my fav ATC, more true to life (esp as im a cpl and work in ATC) and want it as close as poss. Its not perfect but its good, its still being developed and adds to the cockpit workload as in real life ... Can you hack it?!? ... Biggest down point is the cost, but does come with 4 TTS voices and you can add more. Top tip, dont use UT2 with it, works fine but too many of those darn deadlus aircraft are injected (not voxat's fault) i use Traffic X and works fab.

 

I have used Radar Contact in the past and last few days been giving it another go ... Was a bit like meeting an old girlfriend, easy to get on with, no hassle and easy to use, shows its age in areas but wen you get it going it does the job. Got a new key from JD with 2 hours and we exchanged couple of emails in that time. RC might not be in further development but support is 100% A1.

 

Ive looked at pro-atc x, it has some nice features but its a long way off, no spoken airline is a basic requirement and it cant even do that!! Seems to have more flight planning features than ATC, i want an ATC program not yet another flight planner!

 

My opinion ... They all have good and bad points, if you could get all the developers to join forces u'd have one helll of a ATC program.

 

If you have the cash and want as real as poss IMO VOXATC, talking gets it not button pressing!

 

Good performer with track record and good support Radar Contact. You can get IYP which adds voice contact with ATC and a FS2Crew style co-pilot.

 

PFE ??? Dunno ... But it looks like it has some good features, i might have a short fling with it, think its worth a punt but wont stop me using VOXATC.

 

What ever you get enjoy it and welcome to the world of ATC.

 

Rich

I have been watching this very interest thread since the OP first put it up.  As many of you might know I have been on the beta team for Radar Contact for years.  So what I have to say is biased toward Radar Contact. So much of the comment have been on voice sounds,.

 

First we had many real world ATC controllers on the team from the onset.  Real world ATC procedures are not the same from FAA and ICAO.  We made those differences part of RC.  Next as you are flying, take note that "controls" are not the same as "centers" in the US.  Next when you are within either a  center or a control there are sectors that switch you from on sector to another.  Radar Contact does all those.  Also its ATIS is directed by the ground weather at the destination.

 

During this discussion, everyone is harping about how a voice sounds.  Do you care about real world ATC procedures?  My voice is one of the voices in RC and I DON'T sound robotic.  In addition I use pre-recorded ATC sounds in addition to my RC sounds and its very realistic since I have thousands of hours of flying in the real world.  Here is a point that many have missed, fly across the pond at night and see who is following you. FSX default ATC requires you to sit in front of you computer to monitor messages, RC does not. 

 

Before we stopped development of RC v5 we were working on SID/STAR incorporation.  There were many issues that needed to be worked through.  For example I put SID and STAR's in my flight plan, others don't.  Another potential issue, there are thousands of names for SID/STARs around the world, the correct phrasing is expect "XXXX arrival at XXXX airport".  Were you going to phrase that phonetically or record the names.  We had almost solved the altitude and speed restriction issues with every SID/STAR.  Its very complicated,

and if we continue, we will have this done.

 

My last comment to everyone, ATC is very complex in the FS world and I could go on and on about all the issues, but will not, if you question that, look at the FAA ATC rules online, and that just for the US, Europe is even more of a challenge.   For now, I ONLY use Radar Contact, IMHO its still the most accurate program available and it covers the entire world.

 

Bob  

I agree Radar Contact is the best available yet. Let's hope V5 comes out one day.

 

Cheers

I use Radar Contact exclusively because of its rock-solid stability and international procedural fidelity. With Nick Schreger's (aka Meatwater) voice file edits, it's a good deal less robotic-sounding, especially when I run it from an SSD on a fast second PC instead of on the FSX machine. I do wish we could get some more voices recorded for it, especially with some attention to proper pronunciation of worldwide center/control and airport names, but that's a minor annoyance in the grand scheme of things.

 

I suggested some years back (and was not taken seriously at all) that the ideal ATC program would be an intelligent VATSIM client that would allow handoffs back/forth between live VATSIM virtual controllers and an AI control program like Radar Contact when flying outside of active VATSIM airspace. I still think that'd be the best we could hope for in our sim world.

 

Cheers

I do wish we could get some more voices recorded for it, especially with some attention to proper pronunciation of worldwide center/control and airport names, but that's a minor annoyance in the grand scheme of things.

 

More voices? More callsigns!

 

 

I've found that a RC/MS ATC combo is the best option. You get all of RC's benefits combined with the huge pool of callsigns for AI aircraft.

Bonus points for instantly knowing that an instruction was meant for you and the quick, in-sim option to make the AI shut up (by tuning the radio to a different frequency) without losing your ATC connection.

Hi all,

 

Thanks for your comments Bob they make interesting reading, especially about some of the problems faced by developers trying to make an ATC addon for FSX! 

 

Your comment regarding the ATIS at the destination being taken from the ground weather there especially interested me as that would stop the tail wind landing assignments that I am seeing at the minute using the default ATC. I am quite happy to set up my own STAR on arrival so long as I end up on the runway that the AI is using!!

 

One question though, I guess if you set up the STAR at the start of the flight, Radar Contact controls your route right down to the runway then? If you set up the STAR on-route then it wouldn't, is that right? This may be a silly question to those of you already using it, but if you don't ask you don't find out!

 

 

I'm sorry to break this to you but my wife have been a speech therapist for over 15 years. We went over all of the ATC add-ons available and compared them all with RC being the most accurate. I also have a degree in sound engineering, you don't need to be a rocket scientist to tell the difference either.

Whatever you say

 

 

One question though, I guess if you set up the STAR at the start of the flight, Radar Contact controls your route right down to the runway then? If you set up the STAR on-route then it wouldn't, is that right?

 

When you contact Approach at 40 miles out you have a choice...

 

1) Accept the instructions given by the controller for the approach and landing or...

 

2) Request an IAP approach. You are then cleared down to the minimum safe altitude and left to your own devices. Around 7 miles out you will be instructed to contact Tower for landing clearance.

 

Option 2 will allow you to fly the STAR. You also get the option to change the landing runway should you want to although it's unlikely you will. We put the option in to cover every eventuality.

More voices? More callsigns!

 

 

I've found that a RC/MS ATC combo is the best option. You get all of RC's benefits combined with the huge pool of callsigns for AI aircraft.

Bonus points for instantly knowing that an instruction was meant for you and the quick, in-sim option to make the AI shut up (by tuning the radio to a different frequency) without losing your ATC connection.

How many voices is that in RC? With the voice pack (Which includes a second free pack you can download from the PFE forum) you get a total of 99 voices in PFE, broken up for regions of the world, with setting capability to mix and match across regions. (Actually more as with the free XPACK2 voices, there is an option to make them sound more like they are coming over the radio. This works for most of the world ok, but some US voices it distorts, to sounding more artificial.) Also PFE works with MCE as well. (What's MS?). It also increases the number of callsigns read to about 1000.

More voices? More callsigns!

 

I've found that a RC/MS ATC combo is the best option. You get all of RC's benefits combined with the huge pool of callsigns for AI aircraft.

Can you explain this a bit? I have RC and I have never learned of this. One of the things that bugs me about RC is that it doesn't have some call signs I want.

Can you explain this a bit? I have RC and I have never learned of this. One of the things that bugs me about RC is that it doesn't have some call signs I want.

He means to uncheck RC's interaction with AI and listen to the MS default chatter.

PFE might meet all the functional standards but it sounds like crap.

 

"my wife have has been a speech therapist for over 15 years."

 

Maybe get her to check your posts :rolleyes:

"my wife have has been a speech therapist for over 15 years."

 

Maybe get her to check your posts :rolleyes:

 

That's what I have you for. Thanks for the correction.