Ray,>>If you check my replies I never responded to the original>question - only to subsequent ones where I felt I could>contribute something.My response was to the original question, and you had already had four says at that stage. >Please write to Radar Contact at the address in the docs>regarding this.Why? It is currently doing no harm in my 'rejects' box.>>As a customer you are perfectly entitled to buy what you>want.FS 2004 ATC came bundled with the basic product, so I did not have to buy it (since I did not buy FS 2004).>I never said you couldn't voice your own opinion. That's what>these boards are all about.In practice, it is increasingly the case that only 'right on' opinions about 'right on' products are allowed to pass unhindered.>As a purchaser of FS2004 I'm perfectly entitled to voice an>opinion on it. I don't expect everyone to agree with me but I>defend my right and that of everyone else to express an>opinion on any flight sim related matter.Unfortunately, I seemingly don't have a right to respond honestly and in a minor and balanced way to a request for an opinion about Radar Contact without fear of this type of diversion.Regards.Michael

Hi allDoes AISmooth work in 2K2? Yes, some of us are still using it :-)http://online.vatsimindicators.net/916312/3.png

Good one TomJimCYWG

Michael,It seems that your discussion with Ray has turned from the original question to a debate on comments and opinions, which does not address the issue about Radar Contact functionality.First Ray and the rest of the beta team have access to a lot of information about real world air traffic control than most simmers. Our team is made up of aviation folks from many different backgrounds, including active air traffic controllers from both the US and Europe with over 50 years of experience between them. Not to mention the real world pilots and the many of us that have thousands of hours flying time in the military. The team has had to address many of the FAA regulations for example in the US: http://www.faa.gov/ATpubs/INDEX.HTM, and its counterparts in Europe.Having said that we are very aware of the "MANY" errors in FS ATC which do NOT follow FAA rule and guidelines. Radar Contact V4 is as close to those rules as you are going to find anywhere in the FS World.Second on the points you raise about FS ATC "advantages". MSFS did a nice job with their voice generation algorithms. In Radar Contact we will not equal the voice generation, but will make VAST improvements over Radar Contact V3. However with the ability of Radar Contact V4 to control the many problems with AI traffic, the voice issue will be considered minute.A forum is just that a forum, a place to express opinions, ideas, and to ask questions, which is very beneficial to the community. However when an opinion lacks accuracy then it is open for debate. I suggest that you re-read the facts on the Radar Contact web site about what it is and what it is not. When V4 is released very soon it will further demonstrate the weak ATC function of FS ATC.All the BestBob JohnsonDenver

Bob,The original question was for opinions about Radar Contact, and not just from those who like it. Since I fall a little into the latter camp, I made a rare post - concise, honest, balanced and gentle. It did not cross my mind that there was anything controversal there, even to whomever is Radar Contact's biggest fan.>Having said that we are very aware of the "MANY" errors in FS>ATC which do NOT follow FAA rule and guidelines. Radar>Contact V4 is as close to those rules as you are going to find>anywhere in the FS World.I do not doubt Radar Contact's technical content. But an overall opinion is formed from the product as a whole. FS 2004 does, of course, explain many of the differences between its ATC and the real world (in case anyone was in doubt that it's not an ATC simulator). Plus there are lots of sources of information on the subject in case anyone is interested.>Second on the points you raise about FS ATC "advantages". I did not mention any specifically, but I note that even you have mentioned one (and credit to you for doing so).>However when an opinion lacks accuracy then it is>open for debate. I suggest that you re-read the facts on the>Radar Contact web site about what it is and what it is not. An honest opinion can never lack accuracy. I have been using Radar Contact for 3 years so I do not need to read the 'facts' on the Radar Contact web site. I know the product very well.>When V4 is released very soon it will further demonstrate the>weak ATC function of FS ATC.The original question did not ask about future developments (but I hinted at that anyway to maintain balance). (Similar could be said for the next version of MSFS for that matter.)Standard approach and mind-set I see. Do not describe a product by reference to itself, but by knocking what is already there. Luckily the Radar Contact developers and publishers seem to have rather more humour and balance than do some of its acolytes. For that reason alone, I may well try version 4 when it is out (although I hope the interface is better than AdvDip by then).Regards.Michael

>>True, in fact anyone who wants it can have my CD (version 3)>for free - although there may be some issues with the code for>activating it. The Radar Contact crowd seem a decent bunch, so>perhaps they will provide another if asked nicely.>when someone decides to take you up on your offer, let me know who it is, and i'll be happy to give the new owner a key. just send me an email at [email protected]

>>>True, in fact anyone who wants it can have my CD (version>3)>>for free - although there may be some issues with the code>for>>activating it. The Radar Contact crowd seem a decent bunch,>so>>perhaps they will provide another if asked nicely.>>>>when someone decides to take you up on your offer, let me know>who it is, and i'll be happy to give the new owner a key. just>send me an email at [email protected]>>OK jd, but I doubt anyone will (hope they don't on reflection, because this thread has made me think about re-installing for use with the 'default' aircraft to which I am increasing turning back!!).Will version 4 be using AdvDisp? I would be nice if whatever the interface ends up being works better with panels using full-screen overheads, etc.I would like to get back into it, a nice balance between humour and technical proficiency when all goes well.Best wishes.Michael

yes it will use advdisp. i dock advdisp to the panel that comes up when you press the warning button on the default lear. when i want to see my rc options, i press the warning button. otherwise it's hidden. i can fly all day just hitting 1 or 7 ;-)jd

What an excellent idea, JD..!! Could someone explain how this is done, please??Best, Rob

undock the advdisp, so you can move itclick the warn button, so the warning panel comes up. move advdisp and place it on top of the warning panel. size it so you see all the rc text. size the warning panel, so the advdisp fits in the center dark section of the warning panel. in the advdisp windo, click dockthen click the warn button, if you did it right, the panel and advdisp disappears. click it again, and the panel, with advdisp shows up.cool huh?

you know version 3.1 works with fs2004?

v4 will allow you to turn off canned chatter. the ai chatter i have will keep you on your toes, and will be representative of what each ai plane is doing. if you are on tower freq, you will hear me clear each plane to taxi into position hold, clear them for takeoff, and hear planes checking in while on final. i think you will like it.

i'd wait for v4. there will be an upgrade price for existing v3, v2 and v1 users. in the past it has been 10-12 dollars less than purchase price.v4 isn't all new. it builds on the realism of v3. just new features ;-)jd

JD, Thanks for the quick reply..!! Tried it out and it works great here also. Pretty nifty....I'll be looking for other panels that I can use this on too.Best, Rob