FSX-MS PROATC-X v1.7 Released

[AnkH 2,230]

I can understand that for some, this might be a deal breaker. I personally prefer ATC that works from gate to gate using as much of the AIRAC data as possible (departures+transitions, arrivals+transitions, approaches+transitions, missed approaches) over complete voice sets.

 

Well, you might be happy with the SID and STARs, for me it is indeed an absolute game breaker if a voice software for FSX with a price of 70$ calls a British Airways plane with "British Airways" rather than "Speedbird", just to illustrate a second error (or is at least this one fixed now?). Same goes for the fact that "A" is pronounced as "A" when spelling things and not as "Alpha" as it should be (this might be fixed now?).

[Jarkko 59]

you might be happy with the SID and STARs, for me it is indeed an absolute game breaker if a voice software for FSX with a price of 70$ calls a British Airways plane with "British Airways" rather than "Speedbird"

 

Absolutely. I prefer an ATC program that get's me from gate to gate doesn't try and fly me into a mountain.

 

I also love the MadDog and the MD11 even though they do not have modern VCs or liveries for my favourite airline. Why? Because of the system depth and modeling.

 

In the end, we all prefer different things and this is why it's good that there are plenty of options available for us.

[tf51d 284]

Well, you might be happy with the SID and STARs, for me it is indeed an absolute game breaker if a voice software for FSX with a price of 70$ calls a British Airways plane with "British Airways" rather than "Speedbird", just to illustrate a second error (or is at least this one fixed now?). Same goes for the fact that "A" is pronounced as "A" when spelling things and not as "Alpha" as it should be (this might be fixed now?).

This is the problem of opening voice pack creation to the general users. On paper it sounds great as you get a greater variety of voices used. In practice as you can see you lose all quality control ,measures, resulting in a hodgepodge of phraseology! Especially with Callsigns. One voice will say it correctly Speedbird, others British Airways, some may not have it at all resulting in B A W being spelled out.

[Darcy 63]

This for me is the best ATC out there.  I love the fixes and additions.  Well worth the money.

 

Thanks,

Darcy Coutts

[fluffyflops 1,843]

Sorry For maybe a silly question, I'm thinking of jumping over to p3d v3 next week, does ProATC work in p3d v3??

[red259 31]

I purchased this product in the past few months and so far have only used it once. I need to get motivated to go through everything to set it up properly, but this update may be the motivation I need to really dig in and get it up and running for some of my flights. Active development of a product is never a bad thing!

[Glynn 405]

This for me is the best ATC out there.

Thanks,

Darcy Coutts

 

 

Which other ATC programs have you used extensively ?

[Jarkko 59]

does ProATC work in p3d v3??

 

I'm still saving up for v3 so I can't say from experience, but users have reported using ProATC with v3 without problems.

[Jarkko 59]

Which other ATC programs have you used extensively ?

 

Even though this wasn't asked from me and I'm part of the ProATC beta team, here are my two cents:

 

I have years of usage out of ProATC, VoxATC and RC4, but... When ever I don't feel confident flying online, I will end up using all three for training. Here is why:

 

- After using ProATC, I'm confident, that I can fly the holds, procedure turns, transitions and maybe even missed approaches as they are meant to be flown (note to self: I should fly missed approaches more often).

 

- When I don't feel confident enough to speak to ATC, I will do a refresher flight with VoxATC (or with RC4 + It's your plane)

 

- When I feel like becoming "Children of Magenta", I will fly with RC4 so I know that I can manage without LNAV/VNAV holding my hand.

 

So what I'm saying is, that at least for me, there isn't an ATC program to rule them all. All have features that I wished the other programs had. It's about using the one that suites your needs or the type of flying you like to do.

Edited October 6, 2015 by Jarkko

[phmcr 93]

Absolutely. I prefer an ATC program that get's me from gate to gate doesn't try and fly me into a mountain.

 

I also love the MadDog and the MD11 even though they do not have modern VCs or liveries for my favourite airline. Why? Because of the system depth and modeling.

 

In the end, we all prefer different things and this is why it's good that there are plenty of options available for us.

 

Understood, but where can we see a list of recognised callsigns?

[Jarkko 59]

where can we see a list of recognised callsigns?

 

I don't think there is such a list at the moment.

[mcjohns 1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airline_codes-A isn't too bad!

[phmcr 93]

I don't think there is such a list at the moment.

 

Jarkko, can you confirm KLM Cityhopper's 'City' is pronounced correctly?

 

I am on the fence too, but knowing this is correct, would really motivate me.... :smile:

[Jarkko 59]

Jarkko, can you confirm KLM Cityhopper's 'City' is pronounced correctly?

 

I am on the fence too, but knowing this is correct, would really motivate me.... :smile:

 

Unfortunately there isn't a way for me to check this in a reasonable timeframe. I would have to go though all the sound sets to check and verify. (I dont' have deep enough knowledge of ProATC to do this quickly)

 

At the moment, it's safer for me to say, that Cityhopper isn't pronounced correctly. That way I won't cause you a disappointment as I can't verify.

[Darcy 63]

Which other ATC programs have you used extensively ?

 

 

Radar Contact, fsx built in engine and Vatsim

 

Thanks

Darcy Coutts