Sign in to follow this  
abh_jc_03

most liked ATC software

Recommended Posts

I am wondering what is the most enjoyable ATC addon? I would like a program that I can speak to and doesn't sound too robotic.

Share this post


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

I am wondering what is the most enjoyable ATC addon? I would like a program that I can speak to and doesn't sound too robotic.

If you search this forum, you will find an exhausting amount of opinion on this subject. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep.  This is a full highly opinionated topic.    IF you ask me I will tell you VoxATC.  The next guy will say Radar Contact and the next will say PFE and so on and so forth.   If they have demos, try them and see which one you like the best.   They each have their strengths and weakness and some have more strengths than weakness but it's all opinion.   You could do market research to see which one has sold the most copies and go with that one if you want 'The Best' according to sales.  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ProATC/X .  Love it and have not looked back.  Used to use Radar Contact.

 

Darcy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vatsim crushes the market IMO. No atc addon gets close to the realism and immersion you get from Vatsim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only problem with vatsim no controllers when you need one and very little traffic.  I agree the realism is great when controllers on.

 

Darcy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gotta go with WIMS80...

 

Best software is vPilot (client to connect to VATSIM using P3D)  

 

Want lots of controllers available ?  Just follow the EVENT announcements... you should be able to find lots of controllers doing a great job !!  :dance:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ProATC/X .  Love it and have not looked back.  Used to use Radar Contact.

 

Darcy

 

Does ProATC-X still refer to "British Airways" rather than "Speedbird"?

 

And if you level off instead of climbing to your instructed flight level will it chastise you? Last time I tried it on a friend's computer it didn't. An ATC program should monitor what you do - not just issue blind instructions. Radar Contact passes both those tests.

 

You do know the instructions in ProATC-X do not adhere to ICAO / FAA standards don't you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

VOXATC for me. Want ATC you can talk to? VOXATC's got it. Want to push buttons? VOXATC's got it. Want procedural correctness? VOXATC's got it. Want a fully functional demo for 7 days to see for yourself? VOXATC's got it.

 

Yes it's got some room for improvement, but the dev is actively working in this area with pretty regular version updates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Proflight Emulator Deluxe + Voice pack (PFE) for me!! Add MCE to it and you have voice control as well, not to mention the virtual first officer features it has.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does ProATC-X still refer to "British Airways" rather than "Speedbird"?

 

And if you level off instead of climbing to your instructed flight level will it chastise you? Last time I tried it on a friend's computer it didn't. An ATC program should monitor what you do - not just issue blind instructions. Radar Contact passes both those tests.

 

You do know the instructions in ProATC-X do not adhere to ICAO / FAA standards don't you?

 

FWIW this isn't the first time you have asked the same questions, so here goes:

 

Yes, Still British Airways. The people who recorded the voice sets said, British Airways, when they should have said Speedbird. As the callsings are not computer generated, there is no way to fix this without re-recording the broken voice sets.

 

---

 

Does Radar Contact still scream at you if you follow the SID correctly (for example at EDDV anything that connects to WRB VOR)? An ATC program should know that you are flying exactly on the SID - not just scream at you randomly.

 

Does RC it still vector you into a mountain if you forget to request something other that vectors?

 

Does RC still require you to be at an arbitrary altitude within 40nm (or was it 10nm)? You know that something like this is almost never used (at least in Europe), don't you.

 

How complete were the taxi instructions in RC?

 

Without those problems, I would probably still be using RC.

 

---

 

I personally prefer to fly with ATC programs, where you have to import the same AIRAC, that your aircraft is using. That way, both you and ATC are following the same waypoints and altitude restrictions. So for me, VoxATC and ProATC are the ones that have stood the test of time (out of the four I have used)

 

Short answer: A perfect ATC program doesn't exist yet., but there are a lot of good ones out there. You just have to find the one, that has the features you need and not too many features you can't live without.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


Yes, Still British Airways. The people who recorded the voice sets said, British Airways, when they should have said Speedbird. As the callsings are not computer generated, there is no way to fix this without re-recording the broken voice sets.


 

That's one of ProATC's main problems. They provided a utility for the users themselves to create voice packs of their own that were made available to all users. On paper this sounds like  great thing, but in practice you lose quality control. Now for example you may have one voice give you the proper callsign and another give you the ICAO code. I've also seen cases for example of instead of say Delta 123 you get Delta Airlines 123 and not consistently on all voices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW this isn't the first time you have asked the same questions, so here goes again: Yes, Still British Airways. The people who recorded the voice sets said, British Airways, when they should have said Speedbird. As the callsings are not computer generated, there is no way to fix this without re-recording the broken voice sets.

 

 

I only asked in case things had changed since I last asked. Are there any plans to ask those people to re-record Speedbird and any other incorrect callsigns etc?

 

Does Radar Contact still scream at you if you follow the SID correctly (for example at EDDV anything that connects to WRB VOR)? An ATC program should know that you are flying exactly on the SID - not just scream at you randomly.

 

Radar Contact does not 'scream at you'. If you include the SID waypoints in your plan you have to pass within 1 mile of them. Not unreasonable. If you don't include them then you can configure RC so that it ignores your heading until you reach the first waypoint or 30DME from departure - whichever occurs first. It still monitors your altitude of course.

 

Does RC it still vector you into a mountain if you forget to request something other that vectors? Does RC still require you to be at an arbitrary altitude within 40nm (or was it 10nm)? You know that something like this is almost never used (at least in Europe), don't you.... How complete were the taxi instructions in RC?

 

 

Correct planning should ensure you have selected NOTAMS for the arrival airport where appropriate. If you have then you will be given instructions to descend "if able". You don't get chastised if you stay higher.

 

The requirement is FL120 / 12000ft for a far-side approach or FL110 / 11000ft for a near-side. You are expected to be at that altitude 40DME from arrival airport. Whether that adheres to real world rules I have no idea. It would be impracticable to include code for each authority.

 

Taxi instructions were working in the beta version of RCv5 but JD pulled the plug. In v4 you are expected to find your own way to the departure runway. Not difficult with the plethora of moving maps etc. these days.

 

Without those problems, I would probably still be using RC.

 

 

If the lack of proper enunciated instructions doesn't bother you then fine. For others considering an ATC package that might be more important.

 

 

I personally prefer to fly with ATC programs, where you have to import the same AIRAC, that your aircraft is using. That way, both you and ATC are following the same waypoints and altitude restrictions. So for me, VoxATC and ProATC are the ones that have stood the test of time (out of the four I have used)

 

 

RC4 doesn't need to know about AIRAC data. Each waypoint you include in a FS flight plan has a latitude and longitude. That's all RC4 needs. So it doesn't require the expense of keeping AIRAC data up to date.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Radar Contact does not 'scream at you'. If you include the SID waypoints in your plan you have to pass within 1 mile of them. Not unreasonable. If you don't include them then you can configure RC so that it ignores your heading until you reach the first waypoint or 30DME from departure - whichever occurs first. It still monitors your altitude of course.

 

 

Here is the old thread: http://forum.avsim.net/topic/355728-flying-long-sids/  (and yes that is my old account that become locked, when twitter logging no longer worked)

 

In my example, the SID ends 47nm away from the airport, RC starts to tell you that you are off your assigned course (after you are 30nm away from the airport), even though you are still flying the SID correctly. After the flight, RC will critic you even though you did a perfect flight.

 

I tried using the NOTAMS and other options, but it just didn't feel right for me. (FWIW EDDV is still my hub in AirHauler and most of my flights start there).

 

 

It would be impracticable to include code for each authority.

 

 

But that is what ProATC is doing, It knows all the main points automatically from the AIRAC: transition levels, SID/STAR altitude and speed restrictions, G/S intercept altitudes, procedure turns, ...

 

 

In v4 you are expected to find your own way to the departure runway. Not difficult with the plethora of moving maps etc. these days.

 

 

You prefer flight monitoring from ATC. I prefer ATC instructions from gate to gate. That's why it's good that we have choices available.

 

 

If the lack of proper enunciated instructions doesn't bother you then fine.

 

 

For proper procedures and instructions, I will use VoxATC. Almost perfect, especially when flying in Europe (save the free robotic voices).

 

 

RC4 doesn't need to know about AIRAC data. Each waypoint you include in a FS flight plan has a latitude and longitude. That's all RC4 needs.

 

 

As RC4 doesn't know how to assign you the correct SID/STAR (and approaches), it will fly you into a mountain if you let it vector you around freely. The added benefit of using AIRAC, is that you can just copy/paste a real world flight plan from flightaware or eurofpl and off you go. No need to generate FSX flight plans.

 

Horses for courses.

 

EDIT:

 

What I should have mentioned, is that ProATC and VoxATC struggle a bit, when flying in the US. ProATC has challenges with SIDs ending with vectors and VoxATC tends to do radio ping-pong on those flights.

 

RC4 does a consistent job in the US, but has a few challenges in Europe. It might not be a surprise, that two of the three are influenced by people in Europe and one by people in the US.

Edited by Jarkko

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is the old thread: http://forum.avsim.n...ying-long-sids/ ...In my example, the SID ends 47nm away from the airport, RC starts to tell you that you are off your assigned course (after you are 30nm away from the airport), even though you are still flying the SID correctly. After the flight, RC will critic you even though you did a perfect flight.

 

You had two options. 1) Request Direct To once 30 miles out or 2) include the SID waypoints in your plan.

 

But that is what ProATC is doing, It knows all the main points automatically from the AIRAC: transition levels, SID/STAR altitude and speed restrictions, G/S intercept altitudes, procedure turns, ...

 

Great. Hopefully wherever in the world you fly they will all work.

 

 

You prefer flight monitoring from ATC. I prefer ATC instructions from gate to gate. That's why it's good that we have choices available... For proper procedures and instructions, I will use VoxATC. Almost perfect, especially when flying in Europe (save the free robotic voices).

Indeed. JD recognised the need for this but with v5 scrapped it never saw the light of day. RCv4 remains a very good and stable program in most other respects.

Radar Contact doesn't have 'robotic voices'. They are recording of real people's voices.

 

 

RC4 doesn't know how to assign you the correct SID/STAR (and approaches), it will fly you into a mountain if you let it vector you around freely. The added benefit of using AIRAC, is that you can just copy/paste a real world flight plan from flightaware or eurofpl and off you go. No need to generate FSX flight plans.

 

It knows nothing of SIDs / STARs. You include them in your plan or use different options in RC. And you will only be flown into a mountain if you use the program incorrectly. Not sure how many times I need to say that!

 

 

Horses for courses.

 

Indeed. You never came back to me about should you level off instead of climbing to your instructed flight level. Does ProATC-X not monitor your flying?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You had two options. 1) Request Direct To once 30 miles out or 2) include the SID waypoints in your plan.

 

Well that doesn't work in Europe now does it? In the US, you have SIDs/STARs connecting to multiple runways, even once facing in opposite directions.

 

In Europe, the SIDs are runway direction specific (even runway specific). If I were to include the SID waypoints in the plan and the winds changed in between, I would first have to take off, then circle the whole airport, justo to get to the SID I planned, but should not fly due to changed wind conditions.

 

 

Radar Contact doesn't have 'robotic voices'. They are recording of real people's voices.

 

Go back and check, I wasn't talking about RC, I was talking about VoxATC's free voices. The paid voice packages are great (for VoxATC), but expensive.

 

 

And you will only be flown into a mountain if you use the program incorrectly. Not sure how many times I need to say that!

 

Following ATC's advice is using the program incorrectly? If you enable all the workarounds, you end up with an apologetic ATC: "... if able ...". For me, the ATC should know the airport surroundings better than me.

 

 

Does ProATC-X not monitor your flying?

 

It does monitor your course/track. If you get off your planned route, it will vector you back on course. Altitude monitoring is similar to RC's taxi monitoring. Almost anything goes (unless you get too close to other traffic).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Go back and check, I wasn't talking about RC, I was talking about VoxATC's free voices. The paid voice packages are great (for VoxATC), but expensive.

This is an unfair and inaccurate statement Jarkko. For one thing, there are speed of speach and sound effect adjustments provided to set up those free VOXPOP voices which if you take the time can give you supprisingly good results and really great payware voices using the correct speed adjustment. Even the free ones are better than the awful voice packages that come with PATC.

 

Every time PATC releases a new version, I give it a go and still this horse doesn't like that course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is an unfair and inaccurate statement Jarkko. For one thing, there are speed of speach and sound effect adjustments provided to set up those free VOXPOP voices which if you take the time can give you supprisingly good results and really great payware voices using the correct speed adjustment. Even the free ones are better than the awful voice packages that come with PATC.

 

So it is unfair for me to say, that I don't like the VoxPop voices, but it is totally OK, for you to say, that you do not like the ProATC voices?   :blink:

 

(and I already mentioned, that I like the payware options for VoxATC, but they have cost me 150eur so far. For 3 voices, I will call it expensive)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My post is not implying that it is unfair for you to knock Voxpop voices. It is that your reference to robotic voices (in your previous post) is not accurate. As for PATC voices, are you telling me they are acceptable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My post is not implying that it is unfair for you to knock Voxpop voices. It is that your reference to robotic voices (in your previous post) is not accurate. As for PATC voices, are you telling me they are acceptable?

 

Here are VoxATC voices as heard on my system (old live stream): http://youtu.be/wpVgVaqi5a8?t=37m21s   For me, the ATC does sound robotic (mix of default and VoxPOP). This is why I opted to by the add-on voices. And yes, my flying and the video content is terrible.

 

And I'm also telling you that the ProATC voices are acceptable for me. If they are unacceptable for you, then that's OK.

 

With ProATC, I mostly hear the background ATC just like on my (older) video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWm69qu6azs or this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7loUQngkOl8

 

The robotic voices do not sound that bad (for me) if there is real word ATC in between (for others, this might be/is an immersion breaker).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

Interesting discussion

Does ProATC or VOxATC or RC respect minimum safe altitudes in Prepar3d?

Cheers

Jay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Well that doesn't work in Europe now does it? In the US, you have SIDs/STARs connecting to multiple runways, even once facing in opposite directions.

90% of my flying is in Europe and it works for me. For the US you have to adapt your flight plan accordingly. RC4 was tested extensively by several experienced people including 2 r/w AT controllers so I'm confident the program works as intended providing you give it the right info and configure it correctly.

 

In Europe, the SIDs are runway direction specific (even runway specific). If I were to include the SID waypoints in the plan and the winds changed in between, I would first have to take off, then circle the whole airport, justo to get to the SID I planned, but should not fly due to changed wind conditions.

Depends how long you leave it between planning and flying. But you can still get around wrong waypoints during departure. Just request Direct To when able. You may have to put up with a bit of nagging but the best way is not to include SID waypoints - just the exit one as your first waypoint.

 

Go back and check, I wasn't talking about RC, I was talking about VoxATC's free voices. The paid voice packages are great (for VoxATC), but expensive... Following ATC's advice is using the program incorrectly? If you enable all the workarounds, you end up with an apologetic ATC: "... if able ...". For me, the ATC should know the airport surroundings better than me.

You didn't make it clear. Explanation accepted. I've already said that if your destination airport is in a mountainous area you should select NOTAMS. That's the ONE workaround. And are you seriously expecting a program to know the location of every mountain near an airport in the world? :rolleyes:

 

It does monitor your course/track. If you get off your planned route, it will vector you back on course. Altitude monitoring is similar to RC's taxi monitoring. Almost anything goes (unless you get too close to other traffic).

Okay, so that roundabout answer was that it doesn't monitor your altitude once airborne. It is an AIR traffic program after all. Not a ground one.

 

I think we can both agree that all ATC programs have their strengths and weaknesses. You pay your money and take your choice.

 

I've said all I intend to on this. I'll leave others to decide which program they prefer.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And are you seriously expecting a program to know the location of every mountain near an airport in the world? :rolleyes:

 

That is what ProATC is doing, but you need to have an active internet connection for it to work. ProATC downloads the elevation for the airports in your flight plan. I won't say it works flawlessly on every airport (because it is a spot measurement and on of the spots could be in a valley), but I have managed to fly to LOWI (for example) without being given altitudes that would have me descend dangerously low (possible below charted minimum safe altitudes, but still clear of terrain).

 

EDIT: Just to be clear, I'm not promoting ProATC. It has it's problems and is only suitable for bigger aircrafts and bigger airports. Want to fly to small airports an/or  VFR, not going to happen. 

 

 

Okay, so that roundabout answer was that it doesn't monitor your altitude once airborne.

 

 

That is correct.

 

 

I think we can both agree that all ATC programs have their strengths and weaknesses. You pay your money and take your choice.

 

Agree 100%

 

As we have seen on this thread (and on countless Airbus vs Boeing threads), there isn't a one size fits all option.

Edited by Jarkko

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


That is what ProATC is doing, but you need to have an active internet connection for it to work. ProATC downloads the elevation for the airports in your flight plan. I won't say it works flawlessly on every airport (because it is a spot measurement and on of the spots could be in a valley), but I have managed to fly to LOWI (for example) without being given altitudes that would have me descend dangerously low (possible below charted minimum safe altitudes, but still clear of terrain).

 

That sounds interesting. I'm visiting a friend this weekend who has ProATC-X so we might give that a try. Tenerife South is always a good test with Mt Teide (12,000ft) to the west of the airport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does ProATC-X still refer to "British Airways" rather than "Speedbird"?

 

The voice recordings for ProATC/X appear to be of low priority compared to the actual procedural part. I can understand that. And there are only a couple of voices still, because there's no point in adding a lot till all the correct phrases and words are fully established and matched to the procedures.

 

As you know for RC experience it takes a lot of contributors doing a lot of work to attend to that side of things. Hopefully it will happen for ProATC/X one day, because the extra realism of taxi instructions and SID and STAR assignment is a real nice plus over RC4. Maybe then I'll change over, though I'd need to beg some extra options (command-line parameters for startup) so that I can continue to file plans from CDU entries as I do with RC.

 

On this point:

 

And are you seriously expecting a program to know the location of every mountain near an airport in the world?  :rolleyes:

 

 

Well, for me, the answer is yes -- that's surely one of the things that SIDs and STARs, along with their altitude restrictions are for. They have two purposes, in fact, one to make it easier for ATC to mantain traffic flows in the regions around airports, and the other to maintain those flows safely given the physical environment. Oh, a third (lesser one perhaps), to abide by any noise abatement restrictions imposed by the local powers.

 

That sounds interesting. I'm visiting a friend this weekend who has ProATC-X so we might give that a try. 

 

 

Ah, I'll need to make sure my ProATC/X installation is up to date and working, then. Not tried it for a long long time! ;-)

 

Pete

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this