Help with Default ATC

[Chicken Patty 1]

Hello everyone,

 

As we all know, default ATC definitely isn't very bright.  However, I'm not sure if I want to make the leap to a realistic ATC such as VOX atc and such.  So, what I needed help in is, how to request "properly", a different runway for landing.  Example below:

 

I was flying from KDFW to KMIA.  I was told to decent and expect vectors for RWY 30 approach.  I wanted to land on either 8L, 8R, or 9 which was the direction I was heading instead of having to go around the airport.  I didn't confirm approach, I selected to stand by and allow me to land on runway 9.  What I am unclear of is it tells me to do an ILS approach runway 9, to then circle and land runway 27.

 

Is there a specific way you need to request this, or is it just the default ATC that just doesn't work that well?  Any insight would be great, and thanks in advance.

[ap1 16]

It depends if those runways are active or not.  It seems to me when you did this flight, the runways were not active to the default ATC.  Also, you were saying the other runway would take you away from the airport, and you didn't want to do that, well actually doing that which is called a full traffic pattern downwind, base and final, is actually quite  common to do.  So doing that should be no problem.  But when the controller said to circle to land, that actually happens in the real world too, but since the runway you wanted wasn't active, they tell you to circle to land.  If you wanted those runways to be active, you could set the wind direction if not using real weather to get those runways to be active.  This may be kind of long, but I hope that kind of clears things up.

[Chicken Patty 1]

It depends if those runways are active or not.  It seems to me when you did this flight, the runways were not active to the default ATC.  Also, you were saying the other runway would take you away from the airport, and you didn't want to do that, well actually doing that which is called a full traffic pattern downwind, base and final, is actually quite  common to do.  So doing that should be no problem.  But when the controller said to circle to land, that actually happens in the real world too, but since the runway you wanted wasn't active, they tell you to circle to land.  If you wanted those runways to be active, you could set the wind direction if not using real weather to get those runways to be active.  This may be kind of long, but I hope that kind of clears things up.

Yeah, according to the ATIS the landing and departing runways was only runway 30 at the time which was the one they wanted me to land at.  I am also aware of the full traffic pattern as I've done it plenty before.  I just never tried to do such thing and I wasn't sure if I requested it correctly.  I guess it was logical then and I did do it properly, but obviously by simply not been active I was not cleared for it.  One thing I don't get is that, in real life, it's very hard to see planes arriving at KMIA to land West.  Usually they land East as you expect winds to come in from offshore mostly.  Seems like in FSX, it's the opposite.  I'm always getting clearance whether it's landing or taking off heading west.  So while landing and departing east is the most expected direction in real life.  In FSX, landing or departing West is the most expected direction.  Just puzzles me LOL.

[ap1 16]

Yeah, according to the ATIS the landing and departing runways was only runway 30 at the time which was the one they wanted me to land at.  I am also aware of the full traffic pattern as I've done it plenty before.  I just never tried to do such thing and I wasn't sure if I requested it correctly.  I guess it was logical then and I did do it properly, but obviously by simply not been active I was not cleared for it.  One thing I don't get is that, in real life, it's very hard to see planes arriving at KMIA to land West.  Usually they land East as you expect winds to come in from offshore mostly.  Seems like in FSX, it's the opposite.  I'm always getting clearance whether it's landing or taking off heading west.  So while landing and departing east is the most expected direction in real life.  In FSX, landing or departing West is the most expected direction.  Just puzzles me LOL.

Actually KLAX is like KMIA your describing it seems like.  The atc always uses the 6 and 7 runways instead of 24 and 25 like it is in real life.  Only rarely do they use the 6 and 7 runways.  So for those airports it kind of can be frustrating and unrealistic.  That's why setting the winds in that direction can help.

[Chicken Patty 1]

Actually KLAX is like KMIA your describing it seems like. The atc always uses the 6 and 7 runways instead of 24 and 25 like it is in real life. Only rarely do they use the 6 and 7 runways. So for those airports it kind of can be frustrating and unrealistic. That's why setting the winds in that direction can help.

Would a third party ATC such as VOX ATC for example fix that? I heard it is much more realistic in that manner.

[halbach 1]

One of the problems with the default ATC is that you have to ask for the different runway and separately ask for the approach for that runway (if available) or else ATC will continue the original approach and then either circle to land or sidestep to land.  I use Radar Contact 4 and when Approach Control assigns the landing runway I have the ability to select any of the other runways at the airport, whether active or not. The runway and approach are taken care of with a single request.

 

Hal

[ap1 16]

Would a third party ATC such as VOX ATC for example fix that? I heard it is much more realistic in that manner.

I don't think that alone would fix it.  The only thing I know of is to go to the AVSIM library and search for photoreal scenery for KLAX by Glenn Johnson and that will have a file in it to close the 6 and 7 runways.

[spesimen 135]

Would a third party ATC such as VOX ATC for example fix that? I heard it is much more realistic in that manner.

 

unfortunately no. they are much more realistic in other ways though. voxatc is a bit more realistic in that it lets you use SID/STARS and the like, and rc4 is much more strict about busted altitudes and things like that.. but in the end they are still subject to the same thing where it guesses on which runway is active based mainly on the wind.

 

as you noticed, in the real world a lot of major airports have pretty specific rules about which runways get used which unfortunately is not encapsulated in the scenery. another issure for example is that none of them really handle the case where one set of runways is typically used for arrivals and another for departures, like at KSFO where the 28s are usually for arrivals and the 01s for departures under typical weather. getting this kind of detailed info into the atc would be awesome, it's kind of the final frontier for FSX atc, along with having more understanding of the scenery as well..(like the default atc, both vox and radar contact will cheerfully vector you into mountains at airports that are nestled amongst them..)

 

as halbach pointed out, one advantage that both radar contact and voxATC have is that they do deal much more elegantly with the situation where you want to pick a different approach and/or runway. in vox if you disagree with the assigned runway or approach type you can make a request for a specific approach and runway and instead of getting the runaround with default atc it will assume that you know what you want for a reason and will give you vectors accordingly. 

 

cheers

-andy crosby

[Chicken Patty 1]

unfortunately no. they are much more realistic in other ways though. voxatc is a bit more realistic in that it lets you use SID/STARS and the like, and rc4 is much more strict about busted altitudes and things like that.. but in the end they are still subject to the same thing where it guesses on which runway is active based mainly on the wind.

 

as you noticed, in the real world a lot of major airports have pretty specific rules about which runways get used which unfortunately is not encapsulated in the scenery. another issure for example is that none of them really handle the case where one set of runways is typically used for arrivals and another for departures, like at KSFO where the 28s are usually for arrivals and the 01s for departures under typical weather. getting this kind of detailed info into the atc would be awesome, it's kind of the final frontier for FSX atc, along with having more understanding of the scenery as well..(like the default atc, both vox and radar contact will cheerfully vector you into mountains at airports that are nestled amongst them..)

 

as halbach pointed out, one advantage that both radar contact and voxATC have is that they do deal much more elegantly with the situation where you want to pick a different approach and/or runway. in vox if you disagree with the assigned runway or approach type you can make a request for a specific approach and runway and instead of getting the runaround with default atc it will assume that you know what you want for a reason and will give you vectors accordingly. 

 

cheers

-andy crosby

 

Thanks for the reply Andy.  I decided to try out VOX ATC, but can't get it to recognize my commands at all.  Read the guide, set up what needed to be setup, did the training and nothing.  Pretty frustrating :(  Oh well, I'll deal with the default ATC.

[Chicken Patty 1]

Okay peeps. First off, thanks so much for the replies. I've been researching and so far ProATC looks amazing. Really thinking of purchasing it. Any tips or things I should know before I do? I read the review here and it really caught my interest.

[Bjoern 1,173]

One of the problems with the default ATC is that you have to ask for the different runway and separately ask for the approach for that runway (if available) or else ATC will continue the original approach and then either circle to land or sidestep to land.

 

So that's where that sidestep instruction many years ago came from...

 

 

Is sidestepping used regularly in real aviation?

[spesimen 135]

Thanks for the reply Andy.  I decided to try out VOX ATC, but can't get it to recognize my commands at all.  Read the guide, set up what needed to be setup, did the training and nothing.  Pretty frustrating :(  Oh well, I'll deal with the default ATC.

 

hmm, yah i dunno what to tell ya, it should be pretty straightforward. maybe if you post a bit more details about your issue in the voxatc forum somebody can point out a fix. there was a new version posted yesterday also that fixes some bugs also.

 

 

Okay peeps. First off, thanks so much for the replies. I've been researching and so far ProATC looks amazing. Really thinking of purchasing it. Any tips or things I should know before I do? I read the review here and it really caught my interest.

 

i've heard both good and bad things,haven't used it so i can't comment. i would recommend reading through the following thread first though, sounds like some unhappy users because the dev kinda disappeared and there's some issues waiting to be solved. i haven't followed it closely maybe it's not a problem anymore..

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/436018-radar-contact-43-vs-pro-atc-x/

 

i'd also recommend having a look at radar contact it's pretty solid, i used it for a long time before i switched to vox (mainly for the sid/star support). i don't remember if they have a demo version tho.

 

cheers and good luck

-andy crosby

[Chicken Patty 1]

hmm, yah i dunno what to tell ya, it should be pretty straightforward. maybe if you post a bit more details about your issue in the voxatc forum somebody can point out a fix. there was a new version posted yesterday also that fixes some bugs also.

 

 

 

 

i've heard both good and bad things,haven't used it so i can't comment. i would recommend reading through the following thread first though, sounds like some unhappy users because the dev kinda disappeared and there's some issues waiting to be solved. i haven't followed it closely maybe it's not a problem anymore..

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/436018-radar-contact-43-vs-pro-atc-x/

 

i'd also recommend having a look at radar contact it's pretty solid, i used it for a long time before i switched to vox (mainly for the sid/star support). i don't remember if they have a demo version tho.

 

cheers and good luck

-andy crosby

That's also mainly what I want, STARS and SID support which is why I opted for VOX. I might give it another go. It was a tad late so maybe I was just tired and was missing something. Thanks a lot for the feedback. I'll keep you guys posted. :)

[Chicken Patty 1]

So guys, I decided to purchase Radar Contact 4.  I must say, it's like playing a whole new simulator.  So far the two flights I've done, they've allowed me to fly my SID, then upon arrival my STAR.  On the arrivals there has been some deviation, but not much so it's definitely normal and okay with me.  Also, the issue with always landing West in KMIA seems to be fixed with it.  So far winds and active runways seem to accurate for the most part, so far.

 

I gotta say my favorite feature so far has been the altitude assignments.  They clear you for a higher assigned altitude before you reach your current one which is much more realistic as opposed to getting to FL 210, then tower contacting you and clearing you to FL280 per say.  Here by the time you get to FL 180-200 you are cleared for FL280 already.  So far I love it, hope this helps any of you. :)

 

Cheers!

-David

[ap1 16]

So guys, I decided to purchase Radar Contact 4.  I must say, it's like playing a whole new simulator.  So far the two flights I've done, they've allowed me to fly my SID, then upon arrival my STAR.  On the arrivals there has been some deviation, but not much so it's definitely normal and okay with me.  Also, the issue with always landing West in KMIA seems to be fixed with it.  So far winds and active runways seem to accurate for the most part, so far.

 

I gotta say my favorite feature so far has been the altitude assignments.  They clear you for a higher assigned altitude before you reach your current one which is much more realistic as opposed to getting to FL 210, then tower contacting you and clearing you to FL280 per say.  Here by the time you get to FL 180-200 you are cleared for FL280 already.  So far I love it, hope this helps any of you. :)

 

Cheers!

-David

Glad you like it.  I've also been using it for a while now and really enjoy it.  Be sure to read the manual though, that will explain things if you have questions about how something works.