ATC is NOT 'as real as it gets'! :-(

[John Hinson 22]

I'm puzzled at your response. How is VATSIM going to solve AI traffic landing on runways simultaneously? If you are telling the OP to turn AI traffic off he can do that without using VATSIM.

 

We each have a choice on how we play the game, and it should work as designed. In the OP's case it seems it doesn't and we are trying to find out why.

 

John

[Johan_Dees 84]

Indeed, Vatsim has nothing to do with it. (altough Dave may like it, I dont. Flew it in the past when it was SATCO, but the PC's werent strong enough to enjoy it. And I hate seeing deserted airports like I am in the Langoliers movie, and then listen to 14 year old kids playing ATC)

 

The ATC.DLL needs FS9.1 update, and helps a lot. Together with AI Smooth it will solve your problems. ALSO, oversaturation of the radios due to way to many AI of course will always be problem number one.

[DaveCT2003 1,820]

John, sorry you're puzzled, certainly not my intent. I thought I clearly explained why in my post. If English isn't your first langsuge, then I apologize again - we're truly an international group of guys! If English is your first language then I'm sorry once again for not drawing the lines in between the dots.

 

Best wishes to all.

[martinlest2 58]

Hi again... OK, I checked my AISeparation & AISmooth (v.1.20) settings and everything is as per the tutorial already, so I suppose I read it some years back, set things and have been running it that way ever since.

I have searched by FS installation for RJAA bgl files (that is where the screenshot was taken) and there is only one AFCAD. Older AFCADs I had already disabled to a bgx extension and put into a backup folder. I also cannot see any traffic.bgl files for RJAA, Ronzie, I just have my AI traffic programme and its own traffic bgl files. What I did notice is that, although I had removed it, the file traffic030528.bgl had crept back into my scenery/world/scenery folder. Could that explain things? I have removed it again!

Dave, I don't think the non-comprehension was a language issue :-) - more that your suggestion would not effect the AI problems I have. In fact, I have actually joined ivao (rather than VATSIM), and BA Virtual too.. but have done nothing about using either of them so far. I doubtless will when I get others issues sorted out!

One other oddity is that when FS9 crashes, as it is wont to do from time to time, the windows says FS9.0 has stopped working...' BUT, I definitely installed the 9.1 update. If I try to reinstall it, the programme tells me it is already installed and then quits. The menu bar (help/about) in FS also shows me FS9.1, and the properties box of the fs9.exe file shows version 9.1.0.40901, so why that splash screen shows 9.0 I have no idea.

 

Thanks again.

[martinlest2 58]

LATER: Shock, horror!! In spite of what I wrote above, I went to the unpatch.bat file in the FS9/Backup folder and opened it in a text editor. Looking at some of the files listed there, I then compared the file dates of my FS9 installation with an out-of-the-box setup I use for testing (which is 100% sure FS9.1), and sure enough the dates in the latter are later than those in my full FS9 setup. Which means I am missing some, maybe all, apart from FS9.exe, of the files which FS9.1 should have installed. I don't know how that happened...

 

Well, that's outside the scope of this thread. I am going to open a new one, just to get advice on how to rectify this!   :Worried:

 

Edit: Not as bad as I thought, only two files were from FS9.0, including the important terrain.cfg file, all the others had the 01.09.2004 file date of FS9.1. Now I have overwritten those two files, I'll see if it makes a difference (it may well with the newer terrain. cfg file).

 

I can get back to my ATC issues after this little interlude!!!

[mgh 89]

"Games" (in bold type). Yes, we all know what Games are! Where has anyone blamed Microsoft for anything here??? Not sure where your comments are coming from, but you clearly have your own agenda here. I am not commenting on this line of 'reasoning' any more, it doesn't stem from anything posted here and is quite pointless..

 

The title of the thead is ATC is NOT 'as real as it gets'! :-(.

 

That's because  Microsoft developed it as a game. That that's why add-on developers have enanced it to make a a simulation - if you must call it that.

 

The only agenda here is thoseis  who are terrified of being called a gamer - shock horror, we are simulators!!!

[HaraldG 559]

The title of the thead is ATC is NOT 'as real as it gets'! :-(.

 

That's because  Microsoft developed it as a game. That that's why add-on developers have enanced it to make a a simulation - if you must call it that.

 

The only agenda here is thoseis  who are terrified of being called a gamer - shock horror, we are simulators!!!

 

No, Gerry, that is not the point here.

 

The original poster has clearly reported some problems which are not common for FS9's stock ATC (imho) and which he tries to find a solution for.

 

I'm still convinced btw that it has do do something with add-on scenery or enhanced AI traffic. An active traffic030528.bgl file should not be the problem, as it only would add the stock AI traffic with - how were their name, Orbit, Landmark, Pacifica? - those MS generic liveries. But then ATC should handle them as just some more planes to land and take off.

 

But how did the file go back into the appropriate folder? - Perhaps the problem lays deeper within your operating system?

[martinlest2 58]

Thanks Harald.. at the moment I have bigger problems with FS9 than the ATC! FS itself keeps crashing and after 2 weeks of trying to sort this out, I am no nearer to getting a reliably working FS9 installation! Anyone interested, here's the 'crie de coeur' I posted! I am going to try moving my FS2004/Backups fodler and reinstalling the FS9.1 patch. As I said in the thread below, I copied all the files manually, but it clearly hasn't helped. May be a registry problem...

 

http://www.avsim.com/topic/479754-fs9-keeps-freezing-up-crashing-help-appreciated/

[Wobbie 938]

The title of the thread is ATC is NOT 'as real as it gets'! :-(.

 

Maybe, when we first flew FS2004 about 10 years ago, we were very happy with the realism then.

Time has gone by, & we have become a lot more sophisticated & demanding with our hobby, so, what was good for us 10 years ago, is not real enough for us now.

[John Hinson 22]

Hope you get sorted soon, Martin.

 

Once you are, you might wish to do as I do, take a full external backup of FS roughly monthly and it will then be easier to restore if the need arises. I also keep a clean zipped copy of a vanilla FS9.1 so if you do make a fresh install you may wish to take a backup at that point. That would give you an instant base for a future ground-up rebuild or add-on compatibility testing.

 

Its a shame this thread has suffered so many people diving in without reading your questions first but I guess retrospectively it was not the best subject line to use.

 

On the initial issue I am still with Geyer's thoughts. Perhaps not the time to be exploring this but if it can be pinned down to specific airports I would try putting them back to default to experiment.

 

John

 

PS - I don't know if you ever use "System Restore" on your computer but it can play havoc with games like this.

[martinlest2 58]

The thread title was just a jokey/ironic allusion to Microsoft's slogan for Fs2004 when it came out (if memory serves me correctly).... I should try to remember that irony is a very difficult thing to put across on the internet!

 

You are right though, many 'simmers' are constantly searching for a better, more realistic experience - not surprising really. And (pace one or two other comments here), doing this is part of the pleasure of FS9/FSX. I have learned a lot about computing and programming because of it, uploading airports, sceneries (and aircraft repaints) to the AVSIM library over the years and spend as much time tweaking and automating processes (in areas I feel competent to do so!) as I do flying. That's one of the reasons I love FS so much, it's so interactive on that level. The more one learns, technically, the more immersive it becomes, especially when you see great results in FS.

 

Of course, one can make mistakes, which is where backups come in:

 

John, I do what you do, backup-wise - and more! I wrote batch and vbs scripts (another thing I wouldn't have bothered to learn but for FS9) which automatically update full FS9 and FSX backups on a 1TB external HDD, copying new or newer files and deleting ones no longer in the original folders. I run these scripts at least twice a week and periodically copy them to my other PC as a further backup. I also keep a copy of my full FS9 installation, which I never update, plus a 'vanilla' copy of FS9.1, so that I have reference copies if things go wrong. They rarely do, but just this morning I was very glad of the multi-level backups I have, as when I ran my latest backup to the external HDD, I noticed from the text report produced that all my gauge files had been deleted! Sure enough - I had somehow deleted the entire gauge file from FS9. To restore it from the 2nd. PC took less than 30 seconds. One lives and learns! I do use System Restore, because I exclude my D:\ drive, where FS9 is installed. I restrict System Restore to the C:\ drive. Too much water under the bridge to risk using it now though...

 

I have now spent some hours updating and checking files (because of constant CTDs, discussed in a separate thread here) and have just updated my video drivers, so I am set to fly again, hoping for no more CTDs!!! I will monitor the ATC 'problem' and post back.

 

Thanks again for the input.

[John Hinson 22]

Ha! You are well ahead of me then on backups, mine depends on memory (and I don't mean computer memory!). Apologies if you felt I was talking down to you.

 

Yes, we are all here for the "best experience" and what I like about FS is that we can achieve that a lot of different ways. Each to their own . . .

 

J

[mgh 89]

The title of the thread is ATC is NOT 'as real as it gets'! :-(.

 

Maybe, when we first flew FS2004 about 10 years ago, we were very happy with the realism then.

 

Even when new it had glaring  errors. In the UK for example, the Airspace Classification is  totally wrong. It ignores Class A airspace totally and uses Class B airspace which doesn't existing the the UK. Microsoft simply used US classification and ignored the rest of the world.

[martinlest2 58]

Apologies if you felt I was talking down to you.

 

No, not at all.