Arwen, Hi. The most realistic ATC of the non-live variety is PFE. I used RC4 for years but eventually found it irritating and sterile. There are a lot of options in PFE which essentially compiles an adventure file (ADV). The flightplan must be solid, as in wpt altitudes adjusted the way the programme likes them. Do that and its a blast. Oncourse software are the developers and if you visit their site there's tons of helpful info, and I think you can download the PFE/PF2000 manuals so you can evaluate. Can be frustrating to begin with but well worth the effort IMHO. Blows FSX ATC into the verges in every way. Get the voice expansion packs for realistic static etc. Multiple languages, transition level adjustments, SIDS/STARS, great pushback options, auto ATC by FO if you want that. Good luck with it if decide to go that way.

 

Gareth

Arwen,

 

Hi. The most realistic ATC of the non-live variety is PFE. I used RC4 for years but eventually found it irritating and sterile. There are a lot of options in PFE which essentially compiles an adventure file (ADV). The flightplan must be solid, as in wpt altitudes adjusted the way the programme likes them. Do that and its a blast. Oncourse software are the developers and if you visit their site there's tons of helpful info, and I think you can download the PFE abd PF2000 manuals and evaluate. Can be frustrating to begin with but well worth the effort IMHO.  Blows FSX ATC into the verges. Get the voice expansion packs. Realistic static etc. Mutliple languages, translition level adjustments, great pushback options, automated ATC by FO if you want that. Good luck with iy if decide to go that way.

Ye PFE is the best IMO... but to be honest, just like all the others it's a pain in the &@($* to use.... so many steps converting blablabla, launching 2 programs .. removing waypoints etc. etc. only to find that the PFE flightplan is just a little different than your FMC's flightplan even though they use the same .pln.

I just wish the SDK would be released so that someone can change the actual ATC in FSX/P3D instead of using quadruple external bypasses to get it some sort of ATC like feature.

Thanks! I'll take a look at the Oncourse software site.

 

 

It's pretty hard to simulate effectively. Radar Contact was pretty good, but it's dead and the default voices are terrible, they sound like Say from Workbench 1.3.

 

Radar Contact v4 isn't dead. It's still available to buy and is supported on its own forum here on AvSim. You are entitled to your opinion regarding the voices but many people have bought it and enjoy using it. It won the Best Commercial Utility at AvSim's conference in 2006.

 

Other ATC programmes are available but they all have advantages and drawbacks. I have no financial connection to RC4. I use it daily and still derive a great deal of enjoyment from it.

Radar contact v4,  PF emulator,  default fsx,  default P3D, Proatcx - I've bought and tried each of these over the years in my attempt to get realistic atc without resorting to the online atc community. Eventually I found VoxAtc!  In my opinion its as close to real as it gets, not perfect but with the addition of a few Ivona voices and a bit of time spent reading up and learning correct atc phraseology, it gives me complete and convincing immersion. There are still periodic updates being released and the forum support is excellent. It's not cheap once you start adding voices but nonetheless well worth the money. 

Mike 

As far as the plus and minuses, I mostly fly small GA and helicopters (not airliners or large aircraft), at semi-low altitude, and for relatively short distances.  So I don't need anything fancy . . . just something that works better than the default FSX ATC.  I don't mind paying for want I need (even if it mean that I have to save up for it), but I don't want to pay for features that I don't need.

I listened to a demo of VoxATC here. http://www.voxatc.com/Home.aspx

 

Trying to be objective but the voices didn't sound that different to RC4. And am I correct in thinking additional voice sets are 69 euros for 2 voices? Ouch!

I don't have a big problem with FSX default ATC, it's not perfect but it does work well enough.  But P3D SimDirector looks very impressive and I don't see why it couldn't be used as an ATC platform?  I know it's intended for "missions", but I don't see why that mission couldn't be ATC?

 

http://www.prepar3d.com/news/2013/10/4561/

 

Looking forward to investigating the possibilities of SimDirector.

I guess nobody is OK with default ATC but priority of upgrading ATC is low. Modernization of core engine and providing flexible, easy-to-develop sim platform to 3rd party developers is more important than ATC or texture upgrades. Same goes with flight models too. Seriously, who's flying with default planes anymore?

 

If upgraded ATC will be the main reason for someone to change sim, then it's better to spend that money on ATC addon not P3d.

I don't have a big problem with FSX default ATC, it's not perfect but it does work well enough.  But P3D SimDirector looks very impressive and I don't see why it couldn't be used as an ATC platform?  I know it's intended for "missions", but I don't see why that mission couldn't be ATC?

 

http://www.prepar3d.com/news/2013/10/4561/

 

Looking forward to investigating the possibilities of SimDirector.

 

I hadn't considered P3D's SimDirector, but now you're got me interested in it. From what they've posted on it, t doesn't look too complicated.

I guess nobody is OK with default ATC but priority of upgrading ATC is low. Modernization of core engine and providing flexible, easy-to-develop sim platform to 3rd party developers is more important than ATC or texture upgrades. Same goes with flight models too. Seriously, who's flying with default planes anymore? If upgraded ATC will be the main reason for someone to change sim, then it's better to spend that money on ATC addon not P3d.

 

The best thing would be if LM released the ATC/AI Traffic SDK so developers can really get into the core code instead of creating programs that sit on top of the sim.

Some good realistic comments here. Great forum fodder. OK, I admit I abandoned PFE too for a while - it was just too much like hard work. I even went back to FSX ATC for a rest. But when PFE is on song I like it a lot and tend to save and refly those routes. I certainly didn't mean to be hard on RC4 - still a great product. It just seems to me there's a commercial opportunity here for some gifted soul to really nail ATC for flightsim for those not interested in live ATC  - for whatever reason.

 

Arwen, your flying preferences would probably rule out PFE actually. Ah well, at least FSX ATC can feel like a bit of company. To me, in real-world flying the interaction with ATC was a key part of the challenge. A real flight in controlled airspace is by definition unpredictable and a huge part of the thrill of flying and by extension, the flightsim immersion factor. More 'randomness' is what I would love to see in ATC (the tension of unpredictability) and it would go a long way towards dispelling any the 'game feel'.  I'll check out VoxATC again, Ray, thanks for the pointer.

The Relaxed-ATC for FS9 is already a very nice hack. If Lockheed takes a look at that, it will be an improvement.

As far as the plus and minuses, I mostly fly small GA and helicopters (not airliners or large aircraft), at semi-low altitude, and for relatively short distances.  So I don't need anything fancy . . . just something that works better than the default FSX ATC.  I don't mind paying for want I need (even if it mean that I have to save up for it), but I don't want to pay for features that I don't need.

 

Well, in all honesty… for your kind of use I think default ATC is the best by far… All ATC add-ons focus on airliners and if they work with GA they focus on longer trips. I own ProATC/X and only used it with the PMDG 737NGX. Since I am back to flying GA only again, I only use default ATC (well, IF I use any ATC at all, that is) and it has imho the best natural voices (imho all ATC add ons sound bad) and for GA it's great. If you don't want to pay for features you don't need, you shouldn't buy an ATC add-on at all. Imho. 

 

Do you actually plan your flights, using multiple waypoints? Sounds to me (correct me if I am wrong) you mainly fly from A to B? All ATC add ons require flight plans as you would make them for IFR and longer distances. You can't simply hop in a plane and ask ATC for guidance along the way or something like you can with default ATC. Again, I doubt if you would really benefit from an ATC add-on.

 

Default ATC isn't as bad imho as most people think. It mainly (and only) is bad when it comes to vectoring you around during longer flights. When it comes to ease of use, default ATC wins by a large margin. It works flawlessly without having to do anything for it. And as I said it sounds the best. All this imho of course.  ^_^

Same goes with flight models too. Seriously, who's flying with default planes anymore?

 

Nobody, but what I meant is the way airflow is modelled i.e. the whole simualtion physics. X-Plane does this much better, IMO.

 

Edit: In fact, the only sim which FEELS like flying is AeroSimFS. In all others I get the feeling that there is no air present to lift the plane.

 

And textures are important for immersion,  that is one of the things that immediately put me off FSX. And if I am looking to spend another 200 $s on third-party addons for textures and weather + 500$, the price tag for P3d has risen to 750$. So I will leave off until I know what planes and weather addons work best and then start building it up.

 

Maybe I'll get some Christmas money so I can treat myself!

 

Back to topic, I would prefer to use a Live ATC but no ATC channels for Germany as far as I know ...

 

Sascha