Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

doublebubble

Pro-Atc only with no flight plan

Recommended Posts

This may be a bit out there, but, can I use Pro- Atc for the atc only without including there flight plan's? I would like to use PFPX which I;ve been using for quite a while so I would like to use PFPX flight planning but use Pro-Atc purely for the ATC interaction so is this possible?

 

Cheers Rod.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

No you cant because Proatc will only work with its 'own' flight plan. One of the big things lacking in Proatc is the inability to call up a facility at will. At present it works in a very linear fashion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ProATC-X will import flightplans from a number of formats, including directly from FSX and dirctly from a text string.  So if PFPX outputs flightplans, there's a good chance ProATC-X can read it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe it works with PFPX the same way it works for me with FSBuild. I just use the flight plan import function within PATC. One of the options is copy and paste where PATC connects with the clipboard. Only problem is, there is a bug in PATC where it will not accept some imports, because for some reason it decides it can't find a particular waypoint in the plan you are trying to import.

We are all waiting for a much promised updated version that hopefully will have this fix included with a few others required.

 

Regards,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the imput fella's as i've tried a few way's to get it to interact but not yet so I'll just keep on trying and see what happens, thanks.

 

Cheers Rod.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no update from pro atc x since may.. whats happening with it ?

 

The last I saw (a couple of weeks ago), there was an update due out "soon", and only the install process had to be finished. Don't recall what's due to be included, but hopefully we won't have to wait too long to see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The last I saw (a couple of weeks ago), there was an update due out "soon", and only the install process had to be finished. Don't recall what's due to be included, but hopefully we won't have to wait too long to see.

 

This is true, Mourad is slaving away as I type.

 

This may be a bit out there, but, can I use Pro- Atc for the atc only without including there flight plan's? I would like to use PFPX which I;ve been using for quite a while so I would like to use PFPX flight planning but use Pro-Atc purely for the ATC interaction so is this possible?

 

Cheers Rod.

 

Using PFPX or, in fact any flight planner with PATC is a piece of cake. Here is what I do;-

I have PFPX but only use it for transatlantic flying (of which I do very little at the moment) My normal procedure is to use Aivlasoft EFB,  Route Finder for the route (accessible from within EFB) EFB then saves the plan to either the PMDG 737 or 777 (whichever I choose) Once activated in EFB the plan is automatically sent to Opus which is on my FSX machine (EFB is networked) I then copy the FP from Opus and use the copy and paste facility within ProATC this gives me the exact FP in all my addons. Using this method I have never had the wrong runway given and all my flights are perfect and I'm doing two, sometimes three flights a day (I fly for six VA's) Retirement is a wonderful thing..;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Total re-write ...

 

 

no...it is not a total re-write.......... 

 

Roy

 

 

 

 

As everyone knows the proatcx site has been down with an SQL error for the last day and a bit........ hopefully this will be backup as soon as possible.

 

Mourad today has told me today that he has contacted his internet provider so they can look at and resolve this issue. Sometimes it is as easy as repairing the effected SQL table but at other times it requires the internet provider to fix it if the issue is on their end.

 

Roy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.pointsoftware.de/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5785&sid=f0aed53a79d0c1d60edde27f4fdd80da

 

July 28 2013

 

Good Morning

 

Just to keep everyone updated. As I have said before this 'major' update is proving very difficult to implement; in as much

 

that it has been a virtual total code rewrite.

 

Ok I'll give you that...

How about a ' virtual total code rewrite. ' :-)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

no...it is not a total re-write.......... 

 

Roy

 

 

 

 

 

As everyone knows the proatcx site has been down with an SQL error for the last day and a bit........ hopefully this will be backup as soon as possible.

 

Mourad today has told me today that he has contacted his internet provider so they can look at and resolve this issue. Sometimes it is as easy as repairing the effected SQL table but at other times it requires the internet provider to fix it if the issue is on their end.

 

Roy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


there is a bug in PATC where it will not accept some imports, because for some reason it decides it can't find a particular waypoint

 

I'm afraid that isn't the only pair of products I've come across that don't appear to be using the same navdata even though it has supposedly come from the same source.  I don't think it's a particular bug in ProATC-X - in any case, how do you know FSBuild isn't the one at fault?

 

The only definite bug I have come across in ProATC-X is that it gets confused with duplicate waypoints that may be 1,000 miles away e.g. the BCN VOR in Wales and the BCN VOR at Barcelona.  Try planning a route from the UK to Majorca for example and you'll get to the Medditerranean and then be sent back to Merthyr Tydfil!   That's the only example I have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it's a particular bug in ProATC-X - in any case, how do you know FSBuild isn't the one at fault?

I am naturally assuming that it is highly likely that if you have two pieces of software, both using identical data, that the error would be not finding a waypoint that "is" in the database, rather than inserting a waypoint that "is not" in the database.

 

Regards,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For a start, it's not as simple as that.  You know what they say about assumptions........

 

A waypoint maybe in the dataset but may not have a connection to the airway your flight planner is using.  

 

The point is precisely that they are NOT necessarily identical data.  I don't know what you're using but the standard is probably still Navdata.  What you get from them is NOT a single data set, it's a separate download for each application you're using, even if you do have them all to the same date.  Producing those separate downloads to separate data specifications must mean that there's the potential for differences between them.  It's also why you have to pay for several different versions of the same thing.

 

I've come across differences between quite a lot of different applications and this is no evidence to lump all that at ProATC's door.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For a start, it's not as simple as that.  You know what they say about assumptions........

 

A waypoint maybe in the dataset but may not have a connection to the airway your flight planner is using.  

 

The point is precisely that they are NOT necessarily identical data.  I don't know what you're using but the standard is probably still Navdata.  What you get from them is NOT a single data set, it's a separate download for each application you're using, even if you do have them all to the same date.  Producing those separate downloads to separate data specifications must mean that there's the potential for differences between them.  It's also why you have to pay for several different versions of the same thing.

 

I've come across differences between quite a lot of different applications and this is no evidence to lump all that at ProATC's door.

You know what ailchim, I just posted my opinion, I really wasn't looking for a debate, so let's just agree to disagree.

 

Regards,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites