PF3 ATC Demo Test EGKK to EGCC. This is my first use of this program, I thought it was excellant and have now bought it. I am also using FS2Crew Reboot, GSX, UT2 and Aivlasoft EFB (created and saved FP). Full Fliight with registered version later today.

PF3 ATC Demo Test EGKK to EGCC. This is my first use of this program, I thought it was excellant and have now bought it.

 

I did watch a few minutes of the end of the live broadcast already but will have a good look at this one because I missed most.  :wink: Thanks for the video! (First thing I wondered: who the heck hired a frenchman for Gatwick ATC?  )

 

Since you are a ProATC X beta tester: how do they both compare in your opinion? In what regards is one better or worse than the other? Now you have bought PF3, will you forget about ProATC? What made you decide to buy this one? Et cetera.  :wink:

I havent flown LIMF but i can definitely tell you about EGLL SID. If you dont put height restrictions in SID of PF3, when you ask for clearance, you will be assigned initial climb altitude. You set that in MCP and take off. Your aircraft will fly initial height and speed restrictions till you reach 6000Ft. At that point you delete height restriction in FMC climb page and you will fly continuous climb to initial flight level when ATC will clear to resume your navigation and give you higher altitude. I have discussed this with real BA pilots flying B777. They told me that rarely they need to fly entire SID at 6000 and ATC will clear them to higher FL way before they reach 6000. They just delete height constraints in FMC and get continuous climb. Some times instead of VNAV, they switch to V/S in MCP to slow down speed of climb to minimize flying level segment. 

 

They probably slow down the rate of climb to minimize the deck angle in a steeper climb for passenger comfort and to make it easier for the flight attendants to move around the cabin. 

I havent flown LIMF but i can definitely tell you about EGLL SID. If you dont put height restrictions in SID of PF3, when you ask for clearance, you will be assigned initial climb altitude. You set that in MCP and take off. Your aircraft will fly initial height and speed restrictions till you reach 6000Ft. At that point you delete height restriction in FMC climb page and you will fly continuous climb to initial flight level when ATC will clear to resume your navigation and give you higher altitude. I have discussed this with real BA pilots flying B777. They told me that rarely they need to fly entire SID at 6000 and ATC will clear them to higher FL way before they reach 6000. They just delete height constraints in FMC and get continuous climb. Some times instead of VNAV, they switch to V/S in MCP to slow down speed of climb to minimize flying level segment. 

 

Did you look at page 136 of the user manual? It shows the full restriction of the BOGNA 1M SID. "BUT!" notice also where I have put DP. That is where I expect to be at 6,000ft after my initial climbout. Following that the restriction remains. "BUT!" PF3 will choose to clear me earlier or hold me until the end. I actually removed the restriction at BOGNA itself so it goes only as far as 30DME. For me PF3 will clear me to a higher altitude before 30DME three times out of five.

The thing is that those BA pilots get clearance from ATC: you don't get that from PF3. With PF3 you have to mind your altitudes on your own and decide what you want to do on your own because ATC doesn't care what you do at all. So the question is what other ATC-addons do: do they give you clearance for a higher altitude (at random, so to speak) or do they expect you to follow the procedure to the bitter end or don't they care at all.

What nonsense!!! You climb or descend according to PF3's instrructions. If you do it yourself PF3 will remind you at what altitude you should be at.

I did watch a few minutes of the end of the live broadcast already but will have a good look at this one because I missed most.  :wink: Thanks for the video! (First thing I wondered: who the heck hired a frenchman for Gatwick ATC?  )

 

Since you are a ProATC X beta tester: how do they both compare in your opinion? In what regards is one better or worse than the other? Now you have bought PF3, will you forget about ProATC? What made you decide to buy this one? Et cetera.  :wink:

They are both, IMHO, masterpieces, each with it's own strengths. PF3 does need more setting up, but hey, that's part of the fun. Re will I give up PATC or use both, easy, I'll use both :wink:.....But not at the same time. Full flight using my newly purchased full version later today.

Did you look at page 136 of the user manual? It shows the full restriction of the BOGNA 1M SID. "BUT!" notice also where I have put DP. That is where I expect to be at 6,000ft after my initial climbout. Following that the restriction remains. "BUT!" PF3 will choose to clear me earlier or hold me until the end. I actually removed the restriction at BOGNA itself so it goes only as far as 30DME. For me PF3 will clear me to a higher altitude before 30DME three times out of five.

What nonsense!!! You climb or descend according to PF3's instrructions. If you do it yourself PF3 will remind you at what altitude you should be at.

Yep, you now have to actually read those pretty charts..... :wink:

Thanks for the video! (First thing I wondered: who the heck hired a frenchman for Gatwick ATC?  )

 

Also note that the Demo has limited voices.

 

 

 vfr scenario from KBOS RWY 22R to KPVD RWY 05

 

 Rich I'm a bit curious as to what kind of ATC service you are expecting on such a flight.

(First thing I wondered: who the heck hired a frenchman for Gatwick ATC? )

 

Exactly what I was wondering. Didn't someone here in this thread say that the voices sound better than in other ATC programs. Come on. The voices in the video sound ridiculous. ProATC is ten times better in this regard.

 

 

 

PF3 does need more setting up, but hey, that's part of the fun.

 

Not for me. I have a life besides flightsim. And carving out 1,5 - 2 hours for a full fledged flight is already on the edge. Even more fiddling with the ATC program? No sorry.

 Rich I'm a bit curious as to what kind of ATC service you are expecting on such a flight.

 

To short of a flight Dave ?

To short of a flight Dave ?

 

 No not at all Rich, just being a VFR flight is all. I'm just curious as to how you might expect the flight to go, it is VFR after all.

 From what I've seen in these last 24 pages is that it's all about expectations. The problem is that we all have our own expectations of how the ATC should operate. How it's done in busy TRACON airspace to less busy outlying airports to over in the UK at Heathrow to Cardiff for instance. Not every airport has RNAV stars or pilot nav sids that are followed to the letter, and those that do it's probably more UNCOMMON to fly to the DTW or get clearance to descend via the STAR than not. Expecting to get turned onto final for an ILS at 13nm and 170-190kts at many airports is unrealistic, but again it all comes down to expectations.

Rich I'm a bit curious as to what kind of ATC service you are expecting on such a flight.

Richard if I remember you said it was a 43 nm flight you wanted me to test.

That's well within the 200nm limit of the PF3 demo so you could give it a go yourself if you're able.

BW

Jay

Any reason why the voices sound so digitized and broken in relation to say default ATC or even the FS2Crew voices? Listening to the FS2crew FO sounds way more "normal" IMO

Ray,

 

I was referring to real-world when talking about Towers issuing vectors (actually assigned headings would be a more accurate term).  In the U.S., many moderate activity airports don't even have SIDS or STARS.  At my first facility, KMGM, we would use headings all the time to expedite departures.  Got an F16 waiting to depart behind a Cherokee?  No problem, turn the Cherokee 15 degrees right or left and launch the F16 runway heading.  RC4 is reasonably accurate... but it is certainly not the end-all be-all of ATC (as no program ever will be).

 

Regarding "Line Up and Wait"... it is certainly not a  prerequisite to a takeoff clearance.  In fact after a number of incidents a few years back, the "line up and wait" procedure was curtailed drastically in the U.S. and many towers no longer use it at all.  Towers that still do are now required to document why they need the procedure and develop specific safeguards to prevent an aircraft from sitting on the runway for an extended period of time.  PF3 issuing Cleared for Takeoff from the hold short line is completely realistic.

 

MD

Any reason why the voices sound so digitized and broken in relation to say default ATC or even the FS2Crew voices? Listening to the FS2crew FO sounds way more "normal" IMO

Are you referring to a PFE video or a PF3 video? The voices do not sound digitised at all check my sig below.

PF3 allows users to "slow down" the voices if they don't understand them at full speed with static etc (which is how real ATC is). And that's probably what you heard.There are one or two American voice sets that don't sound so good dating back to PF2000 days. PF3 though has 119 voice sets and you can turn off voices you don't like.

Watch the vid below. I purposely included normal voices from the cabin, ground staff etc for comparison. I can't tell the difference!!!

Ray,

 

I was referring to real-world when talking about Towers issuing vectors (actually assigned headings would be a more accurate term).  In the U.S., many moderate activity airports don't even have SIDS or STARS.  At my first facility, KMGM, we would use headings all the time to expedite departures.  Got an F16 waiting to depart behind a Cherokee?  No problem, turn the Cherokee 15 degrees right or left and launch the F16 runway heading.  RC4 is reasonably accurate... but it is certainly not the end-all be-all of ATC (as no program ever will be).

 

Regarding "Line Up and Wait"... it is certainly not a  prerequisite to a takeoff clearance.  In fact after a number of incidents a few years back, the "line up and wait" procedure was curtailed drastically in the U.S. and many towers no longer use it at all.  Towers that still do are now required to document why they need the procedure and develop specific safeguards to prevent an aircraft from sitting on the runway for an extended period of time.  PF3 issuing Cleared for Takeoff from the hold short line is completely realistic.

 

MD

 

That is very strange because I listen to live ATC from major airports all over the US  almost daily , just to mention a few, Atlanta ( the nations busiest) , Miami, Fort Lauderdale, Detroit, LaGuardia, etc....  I hear "line up and wait"  used by the tower  all the time. By the way as I was writing this post, I was listening to Live ATC Atlanta Tower Runway 8R/26L tower on my Android phone and heard 3 aircraft in a row given "line up and wait".