As for the other point it seems that a lot of Proatc users are under the misconception that ATC does the whole show.

 

That's because it does, it assigns actual SIDs/STAR based on it's updated Navigraph Database and it expects you to fly it. It assigns it's ascents and descents instructions based on those procedure. If you deviate either vertically or laterally it will redirect you back on course, where RC4 or PFE (or PF3) fudges it by allowing you to  define  an entry point, (Usually the transition waypoint)  where ATC will allow you to fly your own way, you fly S turns or circles all the way in it won't care. (I believe RC4 you have to ask for it while on approach. where PFE(3) they are defined preflight.

 

 

it seems that a lot of Proatc users are under the misconception that ATC does the whole show

 

Why would there be? In ProATC, you first have to file a flight plan, just like in the real world. Origin and destination airport, route, flight level and so on.

 

For convenience, the ProATC flight plan window also has a button to auto generate a route for you, if you do not have a route from an external flight planner/dispatch. Is the auto route generation option what is confusing you?

 

After you have filed your flight plan (emphasis on the word plan), ATC takes over and tells you what you can and can't do. A flight plan isn't a list of instructions that ATC must follow to the letter.

Each of the ATC programmes have ther merits and demerits. So the OP has to go with the one he is most comfortable with. Some of them are old and no longer being supported. Some promise updates that never come. PF3 is new and is continuously being updated and tweaked. It is the developer's aim to be the best. That doesn't mean to say that it will do everything you want of it. But it is already the most accurate for procedures and terminology. It is highly flexible and more forgiving. That's not a bad point either because you as Captain are in command, not ATC. PF3 advises you rather than nags you which is more real life too.

... because you as Captain are in command, not ATC...

I'm pretty sure that in the real world ATC is the boss and woe betide any Captain who doesn't follow ATC Instructions. Note they are instructions not requests.

Each of the ATC programmes have ther merits and demerits. So the OP has to go with the one he is most comfortable with. Some of them are old and no longer being supported. Some promise updates that never come. PF3 is new and is continuously being updated and tweaked. It is the developer's aim to be the best. That doesn't mean to say that it will do everything you want of it. But it is already the most accurate for procedures and terminology. It is highly flexible and more forgiving. That's not a bad point either because you as Captain are in command, not ATC. PF3 advises you rather than nags you which is more real life too.

These reasons are a huge factor in why I'm planning on going for PF3

 

Thanks again everyone. Glad I signed up to Avsim. A lot of very knowledgable folk here.

I'm pretty sure that in the real world ATC is the boss and woe betide any Captain who doesn't follow ATC Instructions. Note they are instructions not requests.

True to a point Ray. If I as Captain can offer a cast iron reason why I didn't obey ATC then one is forgiven. legally I am responsible for the safety of the a/c not ATC. That's why NATS ends in an S lol. "Service!"

True to a point Ray. If I as Captain can offer a cast iron reason why I didn't obey ATC then one is forgiven. legally I am responsible for the safety of the a/c not ATC. That's why NATS ends in an S lol. "Service!"

 

Indeed you are responsible for your aircraft and all onboard. And should ATC give you an instruction which you believe would endanger your aircraft you are perfectly entitled to query it. But it would be the exception to change course or altitude without first informing ATC, C = Control :Big Grin:

Indeed you are responsible for your aircraft and all onboard. And should ATC give you an instruction which you believe would endanger your aircraft you are perfectly entitled to query it. But it would be the exception to change course or altitude without first informing ATC, C = Control :Big Grin:

Like the Captain of G-AVRM you mean! On his way to White Waltham for https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqdM9xvxBaA

this display he buzzed a cricket match because one of his mates was playing. This was his retirement flight!

Excellent flying skills! :smile: I suppose you can do anything within reason when you're about to retire. Was he punished?

I use RC4 and PF3. Both are the best ATC addons. PROATC only seems to get updated once a year, and PF3 is updating on a more regular basis, and developer communicates with customers on the PF3 forum.

Pro ATC's limited amount of voices is a turn off for me

 

RC4 I use when the mood suits, as it has been an old favorite for many years, and is rock solid. Bit like and old vintage car, cannot bring myself to remove it.

Excellent flying skills! :smile: I suppose you can do anything within reason when you're about to retire. Was he punished?

No not at all! It's not a difficult manoeuvre. The key difference between White Waltham and Habsheim is that the VC10 was on at least 80%n2, second stage flaps with gear up. At Habsheim the A320 pilot put the engines to full idle and suffered the consequences. He still doesn't accept the blame!

The front part of G-AVRM's fuselage is at Brooklands. You may have seen it when you went to play with the Concorde sim. G-AVRM was used as the BOAC/BA trainer.

RC4 I use when the mood suits, as it has been an old favorite for many years, and is rock solid. Bit like and old vintage car, cannot bring myself to remove it.

What happens when the spare parts run out? lol

The front part of G-AVRM's fuselage is at Brooklands. You may have seen it when you went to play with the Concorde sim. G-AVRM was used as the BOAC/BA trainer.

I saw a VC-10 previously owned by a Middle East prince. The inside was sumptuous with luxury seating in the fore section and the rear was taken up with bedrooms. He donated it to Brooklands several years ago and it's lovingly maintained.

I saw a VC-10 previously owned by a Middle East prince. The inside was sumptuous with luxury seating in the fore section and the rear was taken up with bedrooms. He donated it to Brooklands several years ago and it's lovingly maintained.

Yes that's the Sultan of Oman's Standard VC10. Last time I saw it though the exterior was in very poor shape. In desparate need of a repaint. As you enter the cockpit there's a switch at the back of the OH panel so that the FE can do a firebell test. It scares the sh one t out of visitors!!! :-)

That's the chap! Hardly standard though. Could he not afford the deluxe version? :Big Grin:

 

Sadly, it did look in poor condition externally. I suppose they rely on donations for the upkeep of aircraft.

 

Fortunately they didn't sound that bell when I was there.

When the bell goes off it "get's your attention" as does the stall warning claxon. None of this softly spoken "Stall" one hears in the Airbuses.